Nick Holland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 'adjusting local clock rate to compensate XXs offset"
> 12345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
> Oh, come on.
[...]
> Log entries should be clear and short:
>
> 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
> 1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
> Nov 15 16:16:16 fluffy ntpd[18366]: adjusting local clock by -0.137358s
And fit on one line when possible. Excellent point.
> fits nicely in an 80 col screen (and my 72 char message width). Now,
> let's look at yours:
>
> Nov 15 16:16:16 fluffy ntpd[18366]: adjusting local clock rate to
> compensate -0.137358s offset
>
> Whoopsie, you wrapped. Your wording sucks, too. You convey no more
> info, just as confusing, and you made the message WORSE on at least two
> separate ways. BZZZZT. You lose.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012
Nov 15 16:16:16 fluffy ntpd[18366]: adj rate to reduce -0.137358s offset
The key word here is 'rate'. The current msg implies adjusting the time.
That was one of the flaws in the original ntpd, it would step the time
frequently in response to server jitter, often overshot and stepped back
in the opposite direction after a bit. Time wasn't monotonic, and what
showed up in the log files was time steps.
The new implementation is much better. Thanks, Henning!
> If there is something worse than the general level of illiteracy in the
> computer industry, it has to be the people PRETENDING to be
> sophisticated in human communications who are actually quite inept at
> it. "Discussions" like this one go so far to demonstrate this...
>
> Nick.
> (doing my darnedest to prove my own point)
:-)
--
KBK
Jim. I think he twitched!
