Time Problem in 5.0
wmoran at potentialtech.com
Fri Apr 25 17:29:45 PDT 2003
Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Apr 25), Bill Moran said:
>>I'm going to repeat myself here:
>>ntpdate is depreciated. The functionality in it is duplicated by
>>ntpd. It shouldn't even be in the 5.0 tree. I'm considering filing a
>>pr to request that it be removed. Opinions?
> ntpdate has two nice features:
> 1 - It runs in under a second. This is useful during the startup
> sequence, so you know all of your daemons come up with the right
> time. "ntpd -q" took 3 and 5 1/2 minutes to return my prompt on
> tests on two different machines.
That's because ntpdate is an unreliable hack of the ntp system. Read
some of these docs on reliable time-keeping any you'll understand why
ntpd takes so long, even with -q:
The use of a single NTP server is never considered a good idea.
> 2 - It accepts IP numbers on the commandline, so you don't need a
> config file to just get your time synched while you're setting a
> machine up or just want to test.
That's a nice feature, I'll warrant. But it's hardly a show-stopper.
More information about the freebsd-questions