Re: [ARMini-support] Is it possible to get the correct time
- From: Jim Lesurf <jcgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: armini-support@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 09:37:42 +0000 (GMT)
In article <mpro.nlmzj60eax2l902em.lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Steve Fryatt
<lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I was surprised to find I could find a way to get the machine to fetch
> > the time and adjust the clock. It may well be that it's not designed
> > to do that.
> It isn't designed to do that, unless the delta is much bigger. AFAIK no
> modern system (Windows, Linux, etc) will do it for small changes,
> because stepping back in time can cause problems for anything that
> relies on reading chronological file datestamps.
Is that a reason no-one should be allowed the option which !FreeTime
provided and which - quite clearly - some of us wish?
Your comments above seem a mix of an ideology and a "we must follow
everyone else". Not a very good reason for leaving us with a system that
may fail to correct errors of *minutes* and give the user no choice in the
matter.
How many of us found using !FreeTime caused us problems for the reason you
give above? And does it seem unreasonable for the user to wish to be able
to *set* the clock because that's what they *want*?... and previously were
able to.
It seems a weirdly MicroSoft-like idea that users can't trusted to do such
things so the facility has to be removed. It also clashes with the argument
that the current system approach *does* set the clock if the time error is,
say, 2 mins. So at present we have a system time correction system that
sometimes sets the clock, sometimes it doesn't, and it can be a surprise to
the user which! I can't see that is 'safer' somehow, and does seem a
self-contradiction.
> >
> > Yes, I can see that now but it is quite frustrating not to be able to
> > set the clock by my choice. I don't think I've ever encountered a
> > clock that had that feature before in my life.
> Good luck even finding a configuration option on a modern OS (you have
> to hunt around on the commandline to even change the NTP server on
> Ubuntu Linux, for example).
Again that implies reasoning on the basis that "they all do it". If that's
the argument then we should all use Linux and forget RO. :-)
TBH I've increasingly felt that the arguments in favour of the current
system often boil down to "that's what we decided to do, so like it or lump
it". Yes, I know the current system makes sense for various circumstances
of use. But that doesn't cover all situations. And as Bob illustrates,
users can be caught out because they expect to be able to *set* the clock.
Others may think that an absurd expectation. But I don't.
Bob: Its probably out of place to go on about this here. If you want to
raise this I'd suggest the ROOL forum as being more suitable. Although you
may - like myself - find forums <sic> a pain to use, these days that's
probably the best place. I only chimed in here to help you and in case
there are still ARMiniX/etc users who haven't realised this issue can
arise.
Jim
--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
---
To alter your preferences or leave the group,
visit //www.freelists.org/list/armini-support
List-related queries to info@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
