Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 16:13:00 +0100 (BST) From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk> To: Casey Scott <casey@nixfusion.com> Cc: Walter Hop <walter@binity.com>, freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: ntpd Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0204071612040.19282-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <001d01c1de46$5557d0e0$0601a8c0@nixfusion.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Casey Scott wrote: > Is that to save the resources that ntpd uses, or does it (ntpdate) > circumvent the kernel's 1 second adjustment limitation? At securelevel 2, ntpdate is hamstrung too. ntpd gives your clock a smoother ride; I'd generally prefer it. -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk __/\____/\_____/\____/|_____________________________________ flatline To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.44.0204071612040.19282-100000>