On Thu, 09.10.14 12:44, Matthias Clasen (mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 17:46 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > > > In general: we try to make timesyncd a good *client* for NTP, and > > focus on that. Unlike ntpd or chrony it will not accept NTP requests, > > it will not contain drivers for hardware clocks. timesyncd is supposed > > to be a generic daemon for everything the 99% of devices that just > > need correct time, and nothing more. > > > > In this light our plans are actually to add a minimal PTP client as > > well, that is supposed to just work, if PTP is supported on a > > LAN. Also, in contrast to ntpd we really want to make sure to optimize > > timesyncd for power management, and reduce wakeups. In fact, we are > > looking to syncing about the NTP syncs to wakeups of the network hw, > > so that we never end up waking up hardware for the clock. > > > > So, anyway, I am pretty sure that timesyncd at least in the middle > > term is the way to go for all clients. > > The functionality you described sounds 'good enough' for the workstation > use case to me. The one thing that makes me tend towards 'stick with > chrony' for now is the (lack of) dhcp configuration under nm - which is > what we'll have to use for networking on the desktop for the forseeable > future... NTP servers supplied via DHCP is a nice feature (and as mentioned works fine between networkd and timesyncd), but then again, it's actually not very common that DHCP servers supply that information. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
