Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 17:21:30 +0100 From: Ceri <setantae@submonkey.net> To: Tom Rhodes <darklogik@pittgoth.com> Cc: "Gary W. Swearingen" <swear@blarg.net>, freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: docs/36457: [PATCH] timed(8) Message-ID: <20020403162130.GA60113@submonkey.net> In-Reply-To: <20020403111353.5dcc5a97.darklogik@pittgoth.com> References: <200204020310.g323A2J41698@freefall.freebsd.org> <it4rit92n4.rit@localhost.localdomain> <20020403111353.5dcc5a97.darklogik@pittgoth.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:13:53AM -0500, Tom Rhodes wrote:
> On 02 Apr 2002 14:06:23 -0800
> swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) wrote:
>
> > <trhodes@FreeBSD.ORG> writes:
>
> [SNIP]
>
> > On further examination, I guess it'd be better yet without commas
> > in the short list of three items, so I'd prefer the last of these:
> >
> > If two or more time daemons, whether timed, or ntpd(1), or others
> > try to adjust the same clock, temporal chaos will result. [wrong]
> >
> > If two or more time daemons, whether timed, or ntpd(1), or others,
> > try to adjust the same clock, temporal chaos will result. [ok]
> >
> > If two or more time daemons, whether timed or ntpd(1) or others, try
> > to adjust the same clock, temporal chaos will result. [best]
>
> If two or more time daemons attempt to access the same clock, temperal
> chaos will result. [better?]
Temporal chaos will result if two or more time daemons attempt to adjust
the same clock.
[or]
Multiple time daemons attempting to adjust the same clock will cause a
rift in the space-time continuum.
(You can change that last bit to read "cause temporal chaos" if you prefer;
I got bored of reading that phrase already :)
> In my opinion, saying timed(8) and ntpd(8) again would be nothing but
> repeating. At this point I feel the user or reader should know better
> than to start two time daemons.
Always best to assume that they don't know, I've found. How's this :
Do not attempt to run more than one instance of a time daemon (this includes
running ntpd and timed together). Multiple time daemons attempting
to adjust the same clock will cause temporal chaos.
> What do you think about just omitting the daemon names here all
> togeather. If we use your last sentence, i'd like to omit the ``or
> others'' because it doesn't sound right, at least to me it doesn't...
> I'd rather get an opinion on this though.
Perhaps omitting mention of ntpd and timed is good, since the next sentence
kind of makes that clear:
If both timed and another time daemon
are run on the same machine, ensure that the -F flag is used, so that
timed never attempts to adjust the local clock.
Ceri
--
keep a mild groove on
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020403162130.GA60113>