* Marc Balmer  [2007-10-24 20:25]:

quoted text
> Boris Goldberg wrote:

>

>>   May  be  it makes sense to set "-ncv" as a default behavior of rdate,

>> but

>> there is should be a way to synchronize time without running a demon

>> (don't

>> understand  why  are  people  so  aggressive  about that) if you don't

>> need

>> up-to-second  synchronization  (in my case modern hardware goes less than

>> a

>> second off per day, and really old hardware - less than 10 seconds).

>

> You don't understand the implications of changing the time of a computer

> at runtime.

>

> Time can be seen a continuum whos axis can be stretched or compressed or

> as series of time units with fixed length.  In the first case the

> computer clock runs faster or slower, but no time unit is lost.  In the

> second case the computer runs at constant speed, but time units can be

> lost.

that is NOT the damn point, rdate can use adjtime.
> If either case is acceptable depends on the software that runs on the

quoted text
> computer.  A computer that controls an insulin pump probably should

> run at constant speed whereas a computer that does a task at a certain

> time should not skip time units.  If a cronjob runs at 17:10 and at

> 17:00 your wise cronjob sets the time to 17:20, cron will not start that

> job.

>

> See?

bad example, since cron is the worst example you could pick, it is

reasonably smart trying to deal with time jumps.
but it DOES NOT in the first place using rdate -a.
yet, ntpd is STILL a way better solution, but don't spread fud to push

it either, it doesn't need that.
--

Henning Brauer, hb@bsws.de, henning@openbsd.org

BS Web Services, http://bsws.de

Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services

Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg & Amsterdam