Hi all!
I configured a Motorola Oncore UT+ unit on a FreeBSD machine using ntpd
4.2.6p3 (ONCORE and SHHMEM enabled during configuration). If any Oncore user
could help me I would appreciate.
I am running with the following ntp.oncore.0 file
oncore# cat /etc/ntp.oncore.0
MODE 2
SHMEM /etc/oncore.
Miguel Gonçalves wrote:
2. When surveying finishes (ONCORE_SS_DONE) where can I get the surveyed
position to save it to /etc/ntp.oncore.0? What is the best procedure? I
don't want to survey every time I power up the unit... (the unit has no
backup power)
Afair the position got written to the lo
Hi Terje!
Thanks for your reply.
I switched again to mode 4 and started again to see if I missed something. I
believe I'll only have to wait 1 seconds = 2 hours and 46 minutes... not
much. :-)
Unfortunatelly clockstats doesn't show position, only time. I believe this
is because it's in posit
On 2011-09-06, Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
> I switched again to mode 4 and started again to see if I missed something. I
> believe I'll only have to wait 1 seconds = 2 hours and 46 minutes... not
> much. :-)
>
> Unfortunatelly clockstats doesn't show position, only time. I believe this
> is becau
There is software that works with the Oncore GPS series. Called
""SynTAC" It is Windows-only but it seems to run on my Linux system
under VMware Player. You can place the UT+ into survey mode and set
other parameters. It has a graphic Sat. display. The page says the
licensee expires in 30 day
Howdy!
I have the following lines in my ntp.conf (on Debian Lenny):
server ext-server-1 prefer
server ext-server-2 prefer
server 127.127.1.1
fudge 127.127.1.1 stratum 12
I am running in a situation where one or both of the external servers
may not be accessible. This machine is serving as a tim
Hi!
Thanks for the help!
My /etc/ntp.oncore.0 file is this (I disabled SHMEM)
MODE 1
LAT 41.1745319
LON -8.6560764
HT 146.72 M
HARDPPS
#SHMEM /etc/oncore.0
TRAIM YES
DELAY 25 NS
CLEAR
MASK 0
I'm getting one strange thing:
oncore# ntpq -p
remote refid st t when poll reach
On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 04:47:20PM +, unruh wrote:
> On 2011-09-05, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > It's from gpsd which seems to make the NMEA receive timestamp after
> > the message is processed.
> >
> Never did understand that. Timestamping the beginning of the sentences
> is cheap enough and e
On 2011-09-06, Chris Albertson wrote:
> The OP has an observatory with automated computer controls. I assume
> an extra $30 to replace a GPS would not kill him. Put the Garmin 18
> on a boat. That is it's best use.
If you want to tell my supervisor why a perfectly good GPS needs to be
thrown a
Seth Seeger wrote:
> When ntpd was started, the external servers were not available, so
> ntpd sync'd to itself. Now, the external servers have become
> available, but ntpd hasn't noticed. (It's been a few days.) Is there
> a way I can tell ntpd to keep checking for the preferred servers?
>
O
Rolf,
What version of ntp are you running?
H
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Thanks Herzliche. Your data confirms the data that I've found since posting
the original message. I found this bug:
https://support.ntp.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=870
And then I went back and looked at my server logs... it turned out that it
failed to find the DNS entry (vs just not reaching t
On 2011-09-06, Greg Hennessy wrote:
> On 2011-09-06, Chris Albertson wrote:
>> The OP has an observatory with automated computer controls. I assume
>> an extra $30 to replace a GPS would not kill him. Put the Garmin 18
>> on a boat. That is it's best use.
>
> If you want to tell my supervisor
On 2011-09-06, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> What version of ntp are you running?
According to the OP's ntpq output in the first message of this thread he
is running 4.2.4p* ... the version that ships with Debian "Lenny".
--
Steve Kostecke
NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/
__
Harlan Stenn wrote:
> Rolf,
>
> What version of ntp are you running?
I have an old desktop with suse 10.(1?) running (rpm -qf /usr/sbin/ntpd)
xntp-4.2.0a-70.4
and a laptop, runnig opensuse 11.2 and (rpm -q ntp)
ntp-4.2.4p8-0.1.2.i586
HTH
--
Herzliche Grüße!
Rolf Muth
Meine Adressen duerfen n
Rolf,
Thanks - sorry I missed some of that info from you previous message.
We added initial support for dynamic interfaces in 4.2.4. Numerous
bugfixes and improvements have been added since then.
I recommend you try the latest -stable code (unless you are up for the
latest -dev code, which we b
On 2011-09-06, Rolf Muth wrote:
> Harlan Stenn wrote:
>
>> What version of ntp are you running?
>
> I have an old desktop with suse 10.(1?) running (rpm -qf
> /usr/sbin/ntpd) xntp-4.2.0a-70.4
>
> and a laptop, runnig opensuse 11.2 and (rpm -q ntp)
> ntp-4.2.4p8-0.1.2.i586
Keeping in mind that th
Harlan Stenn wrote:
> Thanks - sorry I missed some of that info from you previous message.
>
> We added initial support for dynamic interfaces in 4.2.4. Numerous
> bugfixes and improvements have been added since then.
>
> I recommend you try the latest -stable code (unless you are up for the
>
Seth Seeger wrote:
remote refid st t when poll reach delay
offset jitter
==
*LOCAL(1).LOCL. 12 l6 64 3770.000
0.000 0.001
rds110.1.3.214 u 538 10
On 2011-09-06, unruh wrote:
> Well, it is actually a $150 dollar unit. $30 for the unit, and $120 for
> your time to solder a couple of wires across the board to get the pps
> out to the serial port and make a box to house the receiver :-)
Why don't the manufacturers provide the PPS signal to th
Greg Hennessy wrote:
On 2011-09-06, unruh wrote:
Well, it is actually a $150 dollar unit. $30 for the unit, and $120 for
your time to solder a couple of wires across the board to get the pps
out to the serial port and make a box to house the receiver :-)
Why don't the manufacturers provide t
On 2011-09-06, Rolf Muth wrote:
> Harlan Stenn wrote:
>
>> Thanks - sorry I missed some of that info from you previous message.
>>
>> We added initial support for dynamic interfaces in 4.2.4. Numerous
>> bugfixes and improvements have been added since then.
>>
>> I recommend you try the latest
On 2011-09-06, Rolf Muth wrote:
> Harlan Stenn wrote:
>
>> Thanks - sorry I missed some of that info from you previous message.
>>
>> We added initial support for dynamic interfaces in 4.2.4. Numerous
>> bugfixes and improvements have been added since then.
>>
>> I recommend you try the latest
> Why don't the manufacturers provide the PPS signal to the serial port
> themselves? Is it meant to be NMEA only?
You are thinking that all GPS recievers are only used for NTP. There
are many other uses of PPS that do not involve the serial port on a
PC. In fact I'd guess that MOST GPS used fo
On 6 September 2011 23:02, Chris Albertson wrote:
> > Why don't the manufacturers provide the PPS signal to the serial port
> > themselves? Is it meant to be NMEA only?
>
> If cost is an issue there are even lower priced options then the one
> from Sure Electronics. Older Moterola UT+ receivers
On 2011-09-06, Chris Albertson wrote:
> You are thinking that all GPS recievers are only used for NTP.
Not exactly. I'm thinking that any GPS receiver that calculatates a
PPS that doesn't provide it to the outside has wasted money. If a PPS
is provided by a BNC connector instead of a serial port
On 2011-09-07, Miguel Gonçalves wrote:
> The performance is quite impressive:
>
> oncore# uptime; ntpq -p; ntpdc -c kerninfo
> 12:02AM up 2:07, 1 user, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
> remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter
>=
27 matches
Mail list logo
