Skip to main content
Unix & Linux

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • 3
    There's probably something else that you need to fix. Making several ntpdate requests should be harmless. The insanely large offset you see (67-odd years, about 71.5 days short of 2³¹ seconds) is not normal. Commented Nov 18, 2011 at 1:14
  • When ntpdate fails to run at all (usually if I've broken a script somewhere) the system defaults to January 1944, so the offset sounds about right. I'm not sure what else I need to fix, but it works fine now. Commented Nov 18, 2011 at 1:20
  • Like @Gilles said, multiple ntpdate requests should be harmless. Ntpdate should be creating a lock file which prevents concurrent runs. If you are seeing problems from multiple ntpdate runs due to your different indexes coming up in quick succession, then maybe there's some sort of race condition, which is a bug which should be reported. I'm sceptical though about whether the problem is as you describe it. Commented Dec 28, 2014 at 17:31