On Fri, 2006-12-15 at 15:18 +0100, Tore Anderson wrote: > * Scott James Remnant > > > I'd actually argue that you wouldn't want to forcibly change the clock > > once the first service is *starting*. As soon as you have at least one > > service running, it's arguably dangerous to slew the clock, and instead > > we should always step it from there on. > > Say what?! I hope you've just mixed up the terms here... > > "slew" -> adjtime() -> safe, clock will never leap > "step" -> settimeofday() -> unsafe, clock will leap [back in time] > > I'll read the rest of your email assuming you exchanged those two. > It's entirely probable ;-) Step to me implies taking small steps, whereas slew implies sliding the clock the entire way.
Not the most unambiguous of terms <g> > > We think it's a bug in our current install; but one that is less than > > the previous bug of the clock being not changed at all. > > > > Debian certainly shouldn't follow suit, unless they're also happy to > > have an open bug that the clock is slewed whenever a network interface > > comes up. > > I actually submitted a bug to Launchpad about this and had it closed > because it was allegedly fixed in the latest release. I didn't verify > that myself, though... Maybe I should. I didn't find an open bug > about it either. Do you have a link? > It looks like a community member closed it in error, I have reopened the bug. Scott -- Scott James Remnant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
