Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 08 Oct 1998 16:58:26 +0200
From:      Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
To:        Matthew Thyer <thyerm@eddie.dsto.defence.gov.au>
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Is tickadj still required in -CURRENT ? 
Message-ID:  <5367.907858706@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 08 Oct 1998 23:12:52 %2B0930." <199810081342.XAA01038@eddie.dsto.defence.gov.au> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199810081342.XAA01038@eddie.dsto.defence.gov.au>, Matthew Thyer writes:
>As the manual tickadj(8) says:
>
>BUGS
>     Fiddling with kernel variables at run time as a part of ordinary opera-
>     tions is a hideous practice which is only necessary to make up for defi-
>     ciencies in the implementation of adjtime(8) in many kernels and/or bro-
>     kenness of the system clock in some vendors' kernels.  It would be much
>     better if the kernels were fixed and the tickadj program went away.
>
>
>So, has FreeBSD-CURRENT's kernel been fixed and can tickadj be removed
>from the base system ?

Yes and no.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp             FreeBSD coreteam member
phk@FreeBSD.ORG               "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
"ttyv0" -- What UNIX calls a $20K state-of-the-art, 3D, hi-res color terminal

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5367.907858706>