[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: NTP-woes

On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 18:47:02 EST, Dave Baker writes:
>> Ok, it lost it's NVRAM again, but here comes the (for me) confusing 
>>  part:
>> Any hints on how I could reliably fix that? I can set the time to 
>>  something closer to reality, then ntpdate works, but that seems 
>>  especially ugly if done in an init-script.

>My interim solution.
>On shutdown, I have an init script to just 'touch /some/filename'
>On bootup, I set the system date to the timestamp of that file, then run
>ntpdate, then run ntpd.

'tis a neat idea, no question. But a solution which would fix the actual
 problem would be nicer ;)

I'll hack that in, anyway.

>I think ntp has a safety check that prevents it from leaping the system
>clock by more than so many years (makes sense really), so getting it set
>close enough in this way was good enough for me.

Uh, 1968->1934 ;-? The default, where ntp complains and exits, is 1.000 
 seconds in any direction. That's why one usually uses ntpdate to set 
 some approximate (for ntp values of "approximate". $deity, I hope noone 
 ever gets that paranoid in Real Life ;) ) prior to starting ntpd.

I guess the actual problem is the negative ctime, but I've no clue 
 whatsoever on how to battle against _that_ one other 
 than finally spending real money (which I'd like to avoid at (arhemm) 
 "any cost" ;) ).

-- "One vi to rule them all, one vi to bind them, one vi to bring them all
-- and in the darkness bind them, in the land of BOFHnet where the shadows
-- lie."                                   "Which vi would that be, then?"
--      Anthony de Boer and Tony Finch

Attachment: signature.ng
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: