Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 11:02:12 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: sobomax@altavista.net Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Ben Smithurst <ben@scientia.demon.co.uk>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: timed/adjtime() on -current Message-ID: <200002141802.LAA70928@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 14 Feb 2000 15:43:19 %2B0200." <38A80676.DD50DA8D@altavista.net> References: <38A80676.DD50DA8D@altavista.net> <9929.950432964@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <38A80676.DD50DA8D@altavista.net> Maxim Sobolev writes: : Why? As long as the timed is in the base system and serves the basic : need to syncronise time across several machines in the LAN I do not : see any objections to not use it. Its main advantage that it's : permit updating time via ntpdate (the thing that xntpd doesn't allow : to do) which is particularly useful for dial-up connections. ntpdate is not needed when you are running xntpd. That's the point of xntpd, lots of small skews in the frequency of the system rather than jerking the system time around too much. Warner 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?200002141802.LAA70928>