From owner-freebsd-current Thu Oct 8 12:30:55 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA00316 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 12:30:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA00291 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 12:30:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.9.1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA07036; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 21:25:17 +0200 (CEST) To: John Polstra cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is tickadj still required in -CURRENT ? In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:20:58 PDT." <199810081920.MAA23658@austin.polstra.com> Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 21:25:15 +0200 Message-ID: <7034.907874715@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <199810081920.MAA23658@austin.polstra.com>, John Polstra writes: >> >The original question was "can tickadj be removed". You answered no. >> >> Sorry, misunderstanding there, yes I think it can be removed. > >It is still useful on 486 machines using the "-t nnnn" option to >correct for badly inaccurate clocks. I don't know of a replacement >for that. Even when running xntpd, this usage of tickadj keeps >the /etc/ntp.drift value within the range claimed to be robustly >compensated by xntpd. Uhm, sorry, no longer true, tickadj has nothing what so ever to do with what time it is any more... -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." "ttyv0" -- What UNIX calls a $20K state-of-the-art, 3D, hi-res color terminal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message