Bug#289267: Debian #289267: ntpdate should use ifupdown instead of rcS to start

2007-01-08 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Fri, 2006-12-15 at 15:18 +0100, Tore Anderson wrote: * Scott James Remnant I'd actually argue that you wouldn't want to forcibly change the clock once the first service is *starting*. As soon as you have at least one service running, it's arguably dangerous to slew the clock, and

Bug#289267: Debian #289267: ntpdate should use ifupdown instead of rcS to start

2006-12-15 Thread Tore Anderson
* Scott James Remnant I'd actually argue that you wouldn't want to forcibly change the clock once the first service is *starting*. As soon as you have at least one service running, it's arguably dangerous to slew the clock, and instead we should always step it from there on. Say what?! I

Bug#289267: Debian #289267: ntpdate should use ifupdown instead of rcS to start

2006-12-14 Thread Scott James Remnant
Matt's asked me to jump in here to explain the Ubuntu changes, and our long-term plan for such thing; as there seems to be a little confusion and/or argument on this topic. On Fri, 5 May 2006 15:17:53 +0200, Ingo Oeser wrote: The proposed solution of using /etc/networking/if-up.d/ works

Bug#289267: Debian #289267: ntpdate should use ifupdown instead of rcS to start

2006-12-14 Thread Tore Anderson
* Scott James Remnant Matt's asked me to jump in here to explain the Ubuntu changes, and our long-term plan for such thing; as there seems to be a little confusion and/or argument on this topic. Thanks, I appreciate it. Our reason for moving this to an if-up.d script is because we're

Bug#289267: Debian #289267: ntpdate should use ifupdown instead of rcS to start

2006-12-14 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 13:07 +0100, Tore Anderson wrote: * Scott James Remnant We use -b because it was what was suggested in the manual page: -b Force the time to be stepped using the settimeofday() system call, rather than slewed (default) using the adjtime() system