Re: ntpd vs ntpdate with no hardware clock
Mark Millard <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.freebsd.devel.arm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Jul 7, 2024, at 10:16, Ronald Klop <[email protected]> wrote: > I created fakertc for my rpi4. > > https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/fakertc/ > > Saves the time on shutdown and sets it back early at boot. As I understand, Bob P.'s file system context is UFS for the root fs. So, per your note about fakertc : QUOTE Note that systems using UFS for the root fs won't need this, as the clock is already restored from info in the UFS superblock. END QUOTE I gather that the UFS superblock did not yet have its first modern time value yet. > Plus I use ntpdate together with ntpd. Works fine. > > Regards, > Ronald > > Van: bob prohaska <[email protected]> >> Datum: 7 juli 2024 18:01 >> Aan: [email protected] >> Onderwerp: ntpd vs ntpdate with no hardware clock >> Just tried using ntpd with a fresh 14.1 installation on a Pi4. >> Near as I can tell, ntpd reports a failure due to the clock >> being off by too much, even if it's set manually to within >> a minute before reboot. Probably that's caused by the lack >> of a hardware clock on the Pi4, linux has a bodge called >> fake-hwclock. Is there an equivalent workaround for FreeBSD? >> >> In the meantime ntpdate seems to work, though deprecated === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com