Darren Reed wrote: > While I can understand that in principle, in reality, unless you are > going to shut your system down because xntpd loses touch with > a time server (and thus the system drifts), time (to an application) > is generally not that important. It is nice to avoid repeated time > stamps (through slowing down a system that has a time in the > future) but if something really cares about this, it'll needs to do > more than just rely on ntpdate being run.
However, some very, very important applications get very, very upset if time isn't correct or adjusts abruptly. There is an RFE lurking here: either a new service for ntpdate separate from ntpd - or - a more sane way of handling ntpdate timeouts. -- richard
