On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 10:57, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Rick Stevens <rstevens@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Jan 30, 2004 12:29 PM > To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > 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 > >
