Re: [gpsd-dev] New 0.5 draft of the SemPiTernal HOWTO

[Frank]

> On May 5, 2016, at 1:36 PM, Gary E. Miller <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> As much as I prefer, and defend, the gpsd/ntpd combo, I also understand
> there is resistance from a lot of people that want to keep things
> really simple.  Strong resistance.  Based on good reasons.
> 
> And I have to say the current gpsd/ntpd handshake is just not very good
> right now.  The GPSD NG driver has seriously bad bahavior by default
> and the SHM driver depends on a deprecated syscall.
> 
> In both the above cases let's not make the best solution get in the way
> of the good enough one.
> 
> gpsd really shines for standalone, non-network time keeping, and that is
> where ntpd, by design, sucks.  So until a good working handshake is
> rock solid, and standalone is well supported, I say keep 20.
> 
> RGDS
> GARY
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
>       address@hidden  Tel:+1 541 382 8588


I agree 100% - I’d like to see clock type 20 stay in NTPSec.  K.I.S.S when a 
non-moving or low power or SoC system needs accurate time and has no desire to 
care about location or motion.

Thanks,
Frank