[ntp:questions] "ntpd -q" is slow compared to ntpdate
extproxy at gmail.com
Wed Oct 15 22:52:58 UTC 2008
> > Thanks. It seems 'sntp -r <server>' is the appropriate replacement
> > for ntpdate.
> I'm sure I'm about to soil my shoe in what may be an old and
> well-trodden pile, but if sntp can set the time as well and as quickly
> as ntpdate, why a new program rather than fixes/enhancements to the
> old one? Command-name inertia can be rather strong. Eg nslookup vs
> dig or host.
Good question. I'd much rather just keep using ntpdate. The ntpd man page is
obviously wrong when it suggests that 'ntpd -q' mimics the behavior of
ntpdate - it doesn't - 'ntpd -q' is dog slow. Along comes 'sntp -r' to the
Very interestingly, 'sntp' is distributed in the ntp emerge package on
Gentoo. However, on Ubuntu, the ntp deb package does not include sntp. In
fact, it doesn't seem like sntp even exists in any package in Ubuntu. I did
find the deb package 'msntp' on Ubuntu, which has the binary 'msntp' which
seems to perform exactly like the 'sntp' binary on Gentoo. The man pages
also look suspiciously similar. Go figure.
More information about the questions