From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 29 05:16:33 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85A0C37B401 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 05:16:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhumketu.homeunix.net (dialpool-210-214-66-5.maa.sify.net [210.214.66.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFE6C43FA3 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 05:16:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from shantanoo@ieee.org) Received: by dhumketu.homeunix.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 00CCC4547; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:47:12 +0530 (IST) Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:47:12 +0530 From: Shantanu Mahajan To: Bill Moran Message-ID: <20030429121711.GA565@dhumketu.homeunix.net> Mail-Followup-To: Bill Moran , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20030424202635.GA652@dhumketu.homeunix.net> <20030428090723.GA580@dhumketu.homeunix.net> <200304280940.40131.wmoran@potentialtech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200304280940.40131.wmoran@potentialtech.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Organization: Eh? Whats that? X-OS: FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE i386 cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Time Problem in 5.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:16:33 -0000 +++ Bill Moran [28-04-03 09:40 -0400]: | On Monday 28 April 2003 05:07 am, Shantanu Mahajan wrote: | > Here are few more examples. | > | > > date;sleep 5;date | > | > Mon Apr 28 14:13:45 IST 2003 | > Mon Apr 28 14:13:55 IST 2003 | > | > > date;sleep 10;date | > | > Mon Apr 28 14:14:26 IST 2003 | > Mon Apr 28 14:14:46 IST 2003 | > | > > date;sleep 15;date | > | > Mon Apr 28 14:15:24 IST 2003 | > Mon Apr 28 14:15:54 IST 2003 | > | > | > Now, I started the timer simultaneously and found | > out that "sleep 5" give me dalay of 5 sec. properly. | > | > Maybe there is problem with date? | > Should I file a pr? | > | > (The machine used is *desktop* machine and don't | > have any load) | | I ran the exact same tests on my newly installed 5.0 | workstation and got the results expected (i.e. sleep 5 | actually waited 5 seconds). | | Perhaps it's not sleep, but your clock on your PC | that is the problem. If you time the sleep command | (with a stopwatch, for example) does it sleep for 5 | or 10 seconds? Is the clock on your PC actually | keeping reliable (or close) time? I also check this with win2k. It is working perfectly. What I did is "time", waited for 5s, and again "time" gave me difference of 5s. | | -- | Bill Moran | Potential Technologies | http://www.potentialtech.com Regards, Shantanu -- An age is called Dark not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it.