Martin Burnicki wrote:
Setting up peers requires that the admins of the involved machines
are willing to do so, since peers can ask the other peers to change
their time.
NTP is a time pulling protocol. Peers make use of the time on the other
peer as one term in the estimation of their time
Hello John,
On Tuesday, April 1, 2008 at 20:18:19 +, John Oliver wrote:
timezone --utc GMT/London
I don't know this tool, but the correct timezone name could rather be
Europe/London, no?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ date
Tue Apr 1 21:05:09 GMT 2008
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ /sbin/hwclock
Tue
Hello,
On Thursday, April 3, 2008 at 16:25:17 +0200, Noob wrote:
STA_UNSYNC (0x0040, clock unsynchronized) is 0. [...] Thus the kernel
should write the system time to the RTC every 11 minutes; but it does
not.
Fine! Don't touch anything, happy man, or it might well tomber en
marche. Real
Noob wrote:
Is the crystal of the RTC supposed to be more stable than the crystal of
the CPU?
Neither is supposed to be particularly stable, although the RTC crystal
may be a watch crystal, so may keep reasonably good time if maintained
at wrist temperature.
David Woolley wrote:
Andy Helten wrote:
offset never went 128ms). With time steps enabled the drift value
settles 90ppm (and again, no step actually occurs).
90ms is a relatively bad static frequency error; a good machine will be
around 10ms. That won't help a clean cold
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Helten) writes:
David Woolley wrote:
Andy Helten wrote:
offset never went 128ms). With time steps enabled the drift value
settles 90ppm (and again, no step actually occurs).
90ms is a relatively bad static frequency error; a good machine will be
My current problem is that drift settles at 82ppm (what I called 90 in
previous email) in one run and then 32ppm in another run (with a reboot
between). This is similar to the problem I had with stepping disabled
where drift would go from +500ppm in one run and then swing all the way
to -500ppm
Unruh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Helten) writes:
David Woolley wrote:
Andy Helten wrote:
offset never went 128ms). With time steps enabled the drift value
settles 90ppm (and again, no step actually occurs).
90ms is a relatively bad static frequency error; a good machine
Fine! Don't touch anything, happy man, or it might well tomber en
marche. Real men don't want the eleven-minutes mode. It is not only
extremely inaccurate by itself, but it also steps on the toes of those
tools that are able to manage the RTC properly.
Would somebody please collect this info on
On 3 apr, 23:10, Richard B. Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
DOES the time step backward?
If ntpd is working properly it should NOT need to step the time at all
with the possible exception of a single step when ntpd is first started.
If ntpd is stepping time regularly, you have some
jkvbe wrote:
On 3 apr, 23:10, Richard B. Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
DOES the time step backward?
If ntpd is working properly it should NOT need to step the time at all
with the possible exception of a single step when ntpd is first started.
If ntpd is stepping time regularly, you
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
that people do some very strange things with computer clocks. I'm
thinking, in particlar, of at least one individual who deliberately set
his clock to an incorrect time in order to see if Ntpd would correct it.
Many people do this. It is the naive users' way of
Hal wrote:
My current problem is that drift settles at 82ppm (what I called 90 in
previous email) in one run and then 32ppm in another run (with a reboot
between). This is similar to the problem I had with stepping disabled
where drift would go from +500ppm in one run and then swing all the
As I've stated before, I don't believe the oscillator is really this
unstable, but I could be wrong. After all, my CPU measurements varied
much more than yours, especially from one run to the next. However, I'm
still open to the possibility that linux's approach to speed measurement
is less
Bloqueador veícluar com tecnologia gsm - Sem mensalidades
Tenha toda segurança para seu carro com um preço justo.
Apenas R$ 299,00 ( sem mensalidades )
http://bloqueadorgsm.vila.bol.com.br/
Compare e Compre.
Rastreador de Veículo
Rastreadores de Veículos
Rastreador GPS
Rastreadores GPS
15 matches
Mail list logo
