On Mar 22, 4:20 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net> wrote: > On 3/22/2011 2:56 AM, prashant sherin wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> ntpd is intended to for continuous, not periodic running. You are not > >> using it correctly. > > >> Cheers, > >> David > > > Thanks for the quick reply. > > ntpd does allow us to run this way. From the ntpd man page: > > > -q Exit the ntpd just after the first time the clock is set. > > This behavior mimics that of the ntpdate program, which is to be > > retired. The -g and -x options can > > be used with this option. Note: The kernel time > > discipline is disabled with this option. > > > The idea is to use it as ntp client. > > > Thanks and Regards, > > Prashant > > The fact that it's possible to use NTPD that way does NOT mean that it > is anywhere close to using NTPD as designed nor is it the best way for > most purposes! You could do almost as well by setting the time from > from my wrist watch which uses VLF radio to receive time broadcasts. > > "Normal usage" is to run NTPD 24 hours a day, 365 days a year or 366 on > leap years.
Hi, First: Thanks for quick response I am fully aware fo how ntpd should be used, i.e. 24/7/365, but that is not what I am asking for. As I stated above, I need to make sure the system clock is roughly (your wrist watch would do) the correct time ASAP during boot as other systems will use this time and can't easily be changed later if time deviates too much when ntpd (later) has initial sync. I presume you are aware of that ntpd will take some samples/time before syncing and that is not good enough. therefore, I still wonder if ntpd -q could be used in favour of rdate? thanks, Fredrik _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
