From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 25 12:54:09 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC23637B401 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 12:54:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pa-plum1b-166.pit.adelphia.net (pa-plum1a-215.pit.adelphia.net [24.53.170.215]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0770F43FCB for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 12:54:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from potentialtech.com (working [172.16.0.95]) h3PJs60n002237; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:54:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Message-ID: <3EA9925E.30201@potentialtech.com> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:54:06 -0400 From: Bill Moran User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20030301 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lowell Gilbert References: <20030424214413.GC90097@grimoire.chen.org.nz> <20030425091950.GA558@dhumketu.homeunix.net> <3EA92FF1.30809@potentialtech.com> <20030425184813.GA674@dhumketu.homeunix.net> <448ytye5xj.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> In-Reply-To: <448ytye5xj.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Time Problem in 5.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 19:54:10 -0000 Lowell Gilbert wrote: > Shantanu Mahajan writes: >>| Also, ntpdate is depreciated. You should be using ntpd with the >>| proper switches/configuration. >> ntpdate was working *perfectly* with >> 4.7R,4.8-Stable. > > > So? That's a significantly different version. > > Are you *sure* you want to be running 5.0? > It doesn't sound like you're much of a debugger yourself, and it's not > as though 5.x is recommended for anybody else yet... I'm going to repeat myself here: ntpdate is depreciated. The functionality in it is duplicated by ntpd. It shouldn't even be in the 5.0 tree. I'm considering filing a pr to request that it be removed. Opinions? -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com