Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 30 Jan 2009 22:46:24 +0800
From:      Rong-en Fan <grafan@gmail.com>
To:        Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r187782 - in head: etc/rc.d share/man/man5
Message-ID:  <6eb82e0901300646t220480bdj92e4a3c72e4bdced@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <87hc3i8via.fsf@kobe.laptop>
References:  <200901272013.n0RKDOBR095434@svn.freebsd.org> <6eb82e0901272050l6678ea37idc8ea53e948a15e5@mail.gmail.com> <87r62nnb7t.fsf@kobe.laptop> <6eb82e0901282128o1e38724bsc2dd7a44ebb7de1e@mail.gmail.com> <87hc3i8via.fsf@kobe.laptop>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 13:28:39 +0800, Rong-en Fan <grafan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Shouldn't we keep ntp running after the clock is adjusted?
>>>
>>> This is correct too.  The effect of `ntpd_sync_on_start' is supposed to
>>> be the same as if we run `ntpdate' before the real ntpd starts, so this
>>> option only applies to the first sync-once instance of ntpd.  The real
>>> ntpd starts later, and finds the clock pre-synced.
>>
>> Hmm... I think I'm confused. According to rc.d/ntpd, if ntpd_sync_on_start
>> is set to yes, it adds '-q -g' to rc_flags. By doing so, ntpd start makes
>> ntpd exists immediately after the first sync. Then, who is responsible
>> to start the "real ntpd" you said above?
>
> Oops, testing with ntpd_sync_on_start again I think I broke rc.d/ntpd.
>
> I thought precmd was run in _addition_ to the start rc command, but it
> only runs before it and affects the flags of start too.  I think I'll
> back out the change until we the sync on start for real.
>
> The folowing seems to work much better, but it shows a duplicate message
> about `Starting ntpd.' so I have reverted the broken change until I've
> worked through the patch a bit more:

Hmm... I think your  patch here is already good enough. As for the
duplicate message, it is unavoidable unless we change rc.subr
(like adding a rc_silent).

Regards,
Rong-En Fan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6eb82e0901300646t220480bdj92e4a3c72e4bdced>