At 2004-04-08T16:20:02Z, Kirk Strauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I guess I'd have to agree. Debian's ntp installer seems to do a reasonable
> job, although I'd like to see it suggest using "pool.ntp.org" as the default
> server name.
Oops! I guess they already do, and I hadn't noticed. Nic
At 2004-04-08T15:09:21Z, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For certain situations, yes. Chrony is much better for high latency,
> inconstant network access. Ntp is not designed for that, on purpose.
OK. That makes sense.
> If you don't configure ntp right, it can screw
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004, Kirk Strauser wrote:
> At 2004-04-08T03:04:46Z, Christian Schnobrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Oh, and... everybody suggests chrony as a far superior and more stable
> > solution than ntpd.
For certain situations, yes. Chrony is much better for high latency,
inconstant
* Kirk Strauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040408 09:05]:
>
> I occasionally hear someone say that chrony is better than ntpd, but
> I've never heard the reasons why.
I tried setting up ntp and found it difficult, but tried setting up
chrony and found it easy. Since I'm just running a few boxes at h
4 matches
Mail list logo
