From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Apr 26 10:03:51 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 416FF37B401
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 26 Apr 2003 10:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E8BF43F3F
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 26 Apr 2003 10:03:50 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.no-ip.com)
Received: from be-well.ilk.org (lowellg.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.147.188.198])
          by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with ESMTP
          id <2003042617034900100e4dq7e>; Sat, 26 Apr 2003 17:03:49 +0000
Received: from be-well.ilk.org (lowellg.ne.client2.attbi.com [24.147.188.198]
	(may be forged))
	by be-well.ilk.org (8.12.9/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h3QH3mPN088846;
	Sat, 26 Apr 2003 13:03:49 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.no-ip.com)
Received: (from lowell@localhost)
	by be-well.ilk.org (8.12.9/8.12.6/Submit) id h3QH3mEO088843;
	Sat, 26 Apr 2003 13:03:48 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: be-well.ilk.org: lowell set sender to
	freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org using -f
Sender: lowell@be-well.no-ip.com
To: Kirk Strauser <kirk@strauser.com>
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>
	<3EA9D2EC.3040304@potentialtech.com>
	<20030426010835.GB5143@dan.emsphone.com>
	<3EA9EDF4.9000702@potentialtech.com>
	<20030426024616.GF5143@dan.emsphone.com>
	<87of2t8f3a.fsf@pooh.honeypot.net>
From: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.no-ip.com>
Date: 26 Apr 2003 13:03:47 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87of2t8f3a.fsf@pooh.honeypot.net>
Message-ID: <447k9hnqbw.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
Lines: 21
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
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 <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 17:03:51 -0000

Kirk Strauser <kirk@strauser.com> writes:

> At 2003-04-26T02:46:16Z, Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> writes:
> 
> > But ntpdate does serve a useful purpose during bootup.
> 
> Dan, something I've always wondered about: if a machine runs ntpd during
> normal operation and is rebooted mainly for periodic maintenance, wouldn't
> it's hardware clock be accurate to within a few fractions of a second during
> the downtime?  I mean, if my clock it NTP-correct at noon, and I reboot the
> machine to do a `make installworld', it will be pretty close to accurate
> when I bring it back online.  Since ntpd launches instantly when not in `-q'
> mode, what's the advantage or point of running ntpdate on boot?  Why not
> just start ntpd as normal and let it smooth over the small amount of drift?

Yep.  For cases where the drift isn't small, though, it's important. 

Some examples:  machines without a working real-time clock, dual-boot
machines that have had the time adjusted incorrectly by another
operating system, machines where the real-time clock had been stepped
on in the last boot...