Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 7 Apr 2002 16:13:00 +0100 (BST)
From:      Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
To:        Casey Scott <casey@nixfusion.com>
Cc:        Walter Hop <walter@binity.com>, freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: ntpd
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.44.0204071612040.19282-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <001d01c1de46$5557d0e0$0601a8c0@nixfusion.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Casey Scott wrote:

> Is that to save the resources that ntpd uses, or does it (ntpdate)
> circumvent the kernel's 1 second adjustment limitation?

At securelevel 2, ntpdate is hamstrung too. ntpd gives your clock a
smoother ride; I'd generally prefer it.

-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk
__/\____/\_____/\____/|_____________________________________ flatline


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.44.0204071612040.19282-100000>