"ntpdate" versus "ntpd"

[Ian Wallace]

On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 10:57, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Stevens <rstevens at vitalstream.com>
> Sent: Jan 30, 2004 12:29 PM
> To: fedora-list at redhat.com
> Subject: Re: "ntpdate" versus "ntpd"
> 
> > "ntpd -q" should do the same thing as "ntpdate".  Of course, a simple
> > scan of the man page would have revealed this.
> 
> i really hate it when i have to prove that i'm not as dumb as i sound.
> as i'm sure i mentioned in a previous posting, "ntpd -q" does *not* have
> the same behaviour as "ntpdate".
> 
> ntpdate works immediately, as far as i can tell.  from reading the man
> page (and from personal experimentation), "ntpd -q" does *not* work
> immediately.  it may very well work at the next sync event, but that
> does not necessarily mean immediately.
> 
> all i'm asking is if there is an invocation of ntpd that emulates the 
> clearly deprecated ntpdate utility.  if not, that's cool, i can live with
> it.  but please don't suggest i go RTFM when i have obviously done
> that, referred to it, and pointed out that it's not quite the same.
> 
> methinks it really is time to hit www.ntp.org for the definitive docs.
> 

There's a really nice writeup on why they are deprecating ntpdate in
section 6 of the FAQ.  It goes into a lot of detail on the history of it
but no work around really.

Hope that helps a bit.  It's located here:

http://www.ntp.org/ntpfaq/NTP-s-config.htm

ian


> rday
> 
>