From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 8 00:14:50 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDA4237B401 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 00:14:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop3.psconsult.nl (ps227.psconsult.nl [213.222.19.227]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551A643F75 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 00:14:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from paul@pop3.psconsult.nl) Received: (from paul@localhost) by pop3.psconsult.nl (8.9.2/8.9.2) id JAA36643; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 09:14:39 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from paul) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 09:14:39 +0200 From: Paul Schenkeveld To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Message-ID: <20030408091439.A36404@psconsult.nl> References: <30340.1049663478@critter.freebsd.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from des@ofug.org on Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 11:49:50PM +0200 cc: arch@freebsd.org cc: Poul-Henning Kamp Subject: Re: Add timecounter option to rc.conf X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 07:14:51 -0000 On Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 11:49:50PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > > (another such example is ntp.conf - the needs of most ntpd users can > > > be met with an ntp.conf generated automatically from information which > > > is already present in rc.conf) > > The new NTP4 automatic configuration stuff is promising in this respect, > > with a little luck people will need to configure nothing at all. > > That would be nice, but we can still do far better than the status quo > for the current version. We actually have some of the required knobs > (inherited from NetBSD along with the rest of rcNG) but they are not > documented and still fall a little short of what I would like to see. > > I would like to have a single ntp_servers variable listing NTP servers > in the host's vicinity; if set, that list would be appended to the > ntpdate command line, and used to autogenerate ntp.conf. Of course, > if it were empty (the default), any preexisting ntp.conf would be left > intact. I also think ntpdate_enable and ntpd_enable should default to > YES if ntp_servers is non-empty, but that might be slightly more > controversial. On would expect that changing ntp_servers in rc.conf would be sufficient to change your ntp servers bus if you leave an existing ntp.conf intact only the first values ever put in ntp_servers will be honoured. This might be very confusing for those not familiar with ntp.conf (and ntp_servers in rc.conf does not invite new admins to learn about ntp.conf). Another thing, *if* we want to automatically set up ntp.conf, what about the NTP servers we were informed of by DHCP? > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org