Bug #114: expand setclock script

Bill Maltby, LFS Organizational bill at nospam.dot
Tue Jan 13 14:31:21 PST 2004


On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Matthew Burgess wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:51:14 -0500 (EST)
> "Bill Maltby, LFS Organizational" <bill at nospam.dot> wrote:
>
> > Good points. For "devil's advocate" purposes: if the LFS user sets the
> > date and time manually, he could reasonably expect it to hold across
> > reboots. And there is noting wrong with that expectation, other than
> > it is not native behavior.
>
> A computer user should *never* expect their machine to do anything
> unless it was explicitly told to do so (except to die an untimely
> death of course).

Of course!

> Therefore if they're experiencing symptoms they
> don't expect they should check the docs, thereby astutely noting that
> man date(1) says "print or set the *system* date and time" - not a
> mention of the hardware clock there at all :)
>
> Of course we all know what users are like (including myself of course)
> so this should be taken for the tongue-in-cheek remark it really is.
>
> Seriously though, I agree with the point that this is a BLFS issue, not
> LFS.  However as the base for BLFS, LFS naturally needs to assess
> whether there is anything it can do to assist BLFS in providing this
> facility to users.

Here is foundation I used. Regardless of (B)LFS domain, we provide a
*basic* system. And in that we do strive to provide *certain* expected
functionality. One of those *could* be (but I do not advocate strongly
*should* be - I was playing devil's advocate only) a steady clock
accuracy. Now, depending on the desired Scope and Bounds du jour, one
might say we should provide this, as many claim we should provide a
basic DNS or network connectivity, or inetutils-like functionality, ...

So I was only pointing out that I believed the expectation is probably
there. Whether we want to include it in LFS, as I said, depends on the
mood of the day.

Just as with adding all the '&&', then removing them, increasing all CnP
ability, then reducing it, ...

Then it starts creeping in again.

Do you also see the humor in this "consistent inconsistency"?

>
> Regards,
>
> Matt.
>

-- 
Bill Maltby,
LFS Organizational
billATlinuxfromscratchDOTorg
Use fixed above line to mail me direct



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list