Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 16:15:06 -0500 From: David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Time Problem in 5.0 Message-ID: <20030425211506.GA47060@grumpy.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20030425184813.GA674@dhumketu.homeunix.net> References: <20030424214413.GC90097@grimoire.chen.org.nz> <20030425091950.GA558@dhumketu.homeunix.net> <3EA92FF1.30809@potentialtech.com> <20030425184813.GA674@dhumketu.homeunix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 12:18:13AM +0530, Shantanu Mahajan wrote: > | > | You really haven't provided anywhere near enough information for us to > | diagnose a failure with ntpdate. > > > sudo ntpdate 216.244.192.3 > 26 Apr 00:14:08 ntpdate[717]: no server suitable for synchronization found So what is your problem with ntpdate? Clearly the problem is that 216.244.192.3 did not respond with an answer. Is your network actually up? Is 216.244.192.3 reachable? Is port 123 blocked in your firewall? Scrolling up thru this thread I see where Shantanu says he tried ntpdate in single user mode. Duh. Networking isn't brought up until the system goes multi. No network, no network time. Altho being up to process 717 in single user is unusual. As for the output of sleep(1), his date(1) is rounded down to 1 second in display so if the first date is at 16.9 seconds and a 1 second sleep later might very well be at 18.0 and appear to be 2 seconds later. Sleep is only an approximate in any case. I remember documentation on other Unix systems stating a "sleep 1" might return immediately. So it was common to use a "sleep 2" if you wanted to hope for at least a 1 second delay. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@hiwaay.net ===================================================================== The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030425211506.GA47060>