[ntp:questions] Re: ntpdate functions successors

[Harlan Stenn]

Dave,

You have twice misread what I wrote.

In article <cjut4j$s1s$1 at dewey.udel.edu>,
David L. Mills <mills at udel.edu> wrote:
>Harlan,
>
>I explained why this is a bad idea in my previous messages. Setting 
>tinker step 0 is just about the most dangerous thing you can do.

I am not discussing "tinker step 0".

I do not see a way to have ntpd say "If the time was to be adjusted right
now, I would adjust it by [-]XX.YYY seconds".

In this mode, the time would *not* be adjusted, ntpd would simply say what
the adjustment would be.

I was asking if the special case "tinker step -0" might be useful to
trigger this behavior.

H