In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Unruh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mohit Aron) writes: >>I've ready in numerous places that ntpdate is going to be deprecated and >>that one should use 'ntpd -q -g' instead. I have also read complaints by > >That does not help if the time difference is less than 128ms, as then ntp >will simply use its algorithm ( which is very slow) to get the right time. >But why in the world are you using the -q? Just let ntpd run and discipline >your clock! Why in theworld do you want it to exit?
If you care about having reasonably correct timestamps in your logs, you need to get a reasonably correct time established at boot time before anything important starts. Once the system time is validated, the rest of the system may be permitted to start, possibly including a long-running ntpd. You don't want that initial step happening after anything else has been started, and the only way to convey this information to traditional /etc/rc scripts is to have the program exit. That is how most systems use ntpdate(1) now, and that is why distributors are so resistant to change (the well-known problems of ntpdate notwithstanding). What they probably actually want is a flag that says "delay daemonizing until the first time the clock is set". -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are [EMAIL PROTECTED]| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
