From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 25 17:29:45 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 0F7C537B401 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 17:29:45 -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 35B5C43FAF for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 17:29:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from potentialtech.com (working [172.16.0.95]) h3Q0TW0n002347; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 20:29:36 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Message-ID: <3EA9D2EC.3040304@potentialtech.com> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 20:29:32 -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: Dan Nelson 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> <3EA9925E.30201@potentialtech.com> <20030425203301.GU45035@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <20030425203301.GU45035@dan.emsphone.com> 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: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 00:29:45 -0000 Dan Nelson wrote: > In the last episode (Apr 25), Bill Moran said: > >>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? > > ntpdate has two nice features: > > 1 - It runs in under a second. This is useful during the startup > sequence, so you know all of your daemons come up with the right > time. "ntpd -q" took 3 and 5 1/2 minutes to return my prompt on > tests on two different machines. That's because ntpdate is an unreliable hack of the ntp system. Read some of these docs on reliable time-keeping any you'll understand why ntpd takes so long, even with -q: http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~ntp/ntpfaq/NTP-a-faq.htm The use of a single NTP server is never considered a good idea. > 2 - It accepts IP numbers on the commandline, so you don't need a > config file to just get your time synched while you're setting a > machine up or just want to test. That's a nice feature, I'll warrant. But it's hardly a show-stopper. -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com