Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #13769 > unrolled thread
| Started by | not.socialnetwork@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-02-28 12:13 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-04-14 06:46 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 219 — 49 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Keeping 'order' without RTC. not.socialnetwork@gmail.com - 2015-02-28 12:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2015-02-28 06:52 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-02-28 13:17 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2015-02-28 07:59 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-28 18:28 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-02-28 19:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-28 19:22 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-02-28 15:48 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-02-28 21:14 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-02-28 22:40 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-02-28 18:01 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-01 01:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-01 07:21 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. cl@isbd.net - 2015-03-01 09:17 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-01 10:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-01 11:29 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-01 17:18 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-01 18:33 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-03-02 09:06 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-02 09:19 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-03-02 17:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-02 09:29 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-02 16:27 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jim Diamond <Jim.Diamond@deletethis.AcadiaU.ca> - 2015-03-05 08:36 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. cl@isbd.net - 2015-03-01 11:25 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-01 11:40 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-01 16:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-03-01 17:11 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-01 18:47 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-01 19:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2015-03-03 22:27 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-04 00:50 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 01:51 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2015-03-04 17:05 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 17:59 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-05 11:46 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-06 00:00 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-06 06:55 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2015-03-04 07:31 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-04 10:00 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2015-03-04 11:01 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-04 22:15 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2015-03-04 22:20 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-05 01:07 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-05 10:20 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-05 10:51 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-05 11:53 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-05 15:35 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-05 17:24 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-05 11:49 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-05 23:56 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 16:06 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-04 22:34 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-04 08:23 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-03-04 11:19 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-03-04 17:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 16:10 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2015-03-04 10:43 +0200
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-03-04 09:28 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 16:11 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-04 08:22 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-28 13:34 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-02-28 09:14 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2015-02-28 08:52 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-28 15:22 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-02-28 15:46 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-28 21:10 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-02-28 19:48 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-03-01 09:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-03-01 07:52 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-01 16:15 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Mike Fleming <{mike}@tauzero.co.uk> - 2015-03-01 20:28 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. not.socialnetwork@gmail.com - 2015-03-01 11:00 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-01 11:17 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-03-03 07:37 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-03 17:21 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-01 11:43 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. RRansil <ransil@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 10:44 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-03-01 19:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-03-01 20:46 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. RRansil <ransil@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 13:12 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. RRansil <ransil@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 13:07 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-01 21:56 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. RRansil <ransil@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 14:49 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-28 18:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-02-28 19:29 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-03-01 14:22 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-01 21:54 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-02 16:12 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2015-03-02 19:57 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. "David B" <askforemail@gmail.com> - 2015-03-03 10:15 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-03-03 19:38 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-04 10:43 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2015-03-04 11:23 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-04 11:30 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-04 16:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-04 16:31 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. "David B" <askforemail@gmail.com> - 2015-03-04 16:38 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-03-04 17:39 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. "David B" <askforemail@gmail.com> - 2015-03-04 16:53 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-04 17:03 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2015-03-04 08:52 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-03-05 20:23 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-03-04 17:29 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-03-05 20:16 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-03-05 22:38 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-03-06 17:46 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2015-03-06 18:45 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2015-03-06 14:56 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-06 06:30 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2015-03-06 08:24 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-03-06 17:46 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2015-03-06 10:02 -0800
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-06 09:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-07 00:34 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-06 06:21 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-06 11:17 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2015-03-06 14:56 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-07 12:14 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Strangio <jackstrangio@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-08 02:38 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2015-03-07 21:15 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-03-07 21:44 -0600
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-03-08 16:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-03-08 09:42 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-03 23:20 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-03-05 08:52 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-05 09:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-03-05 09:47 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2015-03-06 01:31 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-03-11 04:53 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-03-11 05:24 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2015-03-11 07:58 -0700
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-03-11 19:01 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2015-03-11 13:20 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-12 17:17 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-04-12 13:50 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2015-04-13 13:14 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-13 15:10 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2015-04-14 00:30 +1000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-13 17:47 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2015-04-15 22:37 +0200
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-04-17 02:32 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-25 23:09 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2015-04-27 13:13 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-04-13 16:22 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-04-13 21:14 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-04-13 21:55 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-14 09:06 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-14 10:12 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-04-14 10:29 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-14 12:05 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> - 2015-04-14 22:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-04-16 14:11 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-16 20:15 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-04-14 05:25 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-04-16 14:13 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> - 2015-04-16 20:18 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-05-04 03:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-04 04:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Jack Ryan <noreply@remailer.cpunk.us> - 2015-05-04 07:54 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-04 18:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2015-05-04 19:40 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Kees Theunissen <theuniss@rijnh.nl> - 2015-05-04 22:31 +0200
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-04 22:35 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-05-04 19:13 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-05 02:56 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Baeuerle <michael.baeuerle@stz-e.de> - 2015-05-05 08:04 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-05 09:22 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-05-05 08:26 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-05 18:08 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-05-11 23:16 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-05-11 17:52 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-12 07:09 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 06:47 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-12 08:27 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 15:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 17:08 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 17:21 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-05-12 12:41 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 19:03 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 18:26 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 19:59 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 20:05 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 22:58 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-13 01:15 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-13 08:14 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-13 09:24 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-05-12 11:50 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-12 18:52 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-05-12 17:29 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 18:36 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 20:00 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 20:06 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-05-12 06:14 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-05-12 06:09 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-05-12 06:44 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) - 2015-05-12 17:45 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-05-12 21:06 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-04-14 23:18 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-04-14 20:58 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-04-15 06:20 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Andrew Smallshaw <andrews@sdf.lonestar.org> - 2015-04-16 02:58 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-16 05:21 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-04-16 11:42 +0200
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-04-16 12:10 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-16 13:42 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-04-16 15:06 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-04-16 23:09 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-04-16 14:17 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2015-03-04 09:56 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. ruben safir <ruben@mrbrklyn.com> - 2015-04-16 06:13 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-16 12:40 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2015-04-16 16:32 -0400
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-04-17 01:54 +0000
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-17 06:34 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Dr J R Stockton <reply1500@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-04-18 23:13 +0100
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-04-13 20:39 -0500
Re: Keeping 'order' without RTC. Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-04-14 06:46 +0000
Page 8 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 Next page →
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-13 17:47 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mggrue$qj7$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #14521 |
On 13/04/15 15:30, Gordon Levi wrote: > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> On 13/04/15 14:14, Joe Beanfish wrote: >> >>> >>> Please, just butt out of you have nothing to offer. You're worse than >>> the so-called troll. Same for the rest of ya, there's more blather by >>> you folk whining or being super-superior about the "troll" than actual >>> technical discussion about anything. Just shut up already. You think >>> you're so superior when you're just feeding the fire to get your own >>> names up in lights. >>> >> >> If you want time and date to be meaningful - which may or may not be the >> case you have to ensure that they are accurate. > > The OP said, specifically, that he only wanted to keep "order". For > that purpose the time and date don't have to be meaningful. >> >> There are three ways to do that - >> >> - a battery backed clock that keeps time when the 'puter is off. >> - use of some internet accessible clock that you trust to set time on >> boot and keep time after boot >> - manually or magically setting the clock to the correct time on boot. >> >> If none of those suit your bigotry, then go away. >> Posing problems that have no acceptable solutions is even easier than >> dreaming up solutions that are totally impractical. > > Keeping order does have another practical solution. It is only > necessary to set the date and time to a value greater than the latest > date and time that was last used. which any simple script can do. using the mtime of some logfile that records 'shutdown' as the 'last menaingful timestamp' >> >> See the Belling Of The Cat. -- Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. – Erwin Knoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-15 22:37 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <cou20c-ep2.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #14521 |
In article <j6knia997ndg4n6ufjecncb3g27cqhdb17@4ax.com>, Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> wrote: >The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >>On 13/04/15 14:14, Joe Beanfish wrote: >> >>> >>> Please, just butt out of you have nothing to offer. You're worse than >>> the so-called troll. Same for the rest of ya, there's more blather by >>> you folk whining or being super-superior about the "troll" than actual >>> technical discussion about anything. Just shut up already. You think >>> you're so superior when you're just feeding the fire to get your own >>> names up in lights. >>> >> >>If you want time and date to be meaningful - which may or may not be the >>case you have to ensure that they are accurate. > >The OP said, specifically, that he only wanted to keep "order". For >that purpose the time and date don't have to be meaningful. In which case he needs to set a time that is higher than the last access time on any file in the file system. If he uses ext3, 4, xfs or jfs then there is journalling, and the file system is in a consistent state when you get tl execute something late in the boot process, like rc.local. The find/awk/ls/sort script to do this is left as an exercise to the reader. (find most recently accessed file, do a stat on it, and set the system time to 30 sec in the future from that.) If the OP _really_ needs this I can see what I can dig up. I used to do this on an altos machine way back before NTP. -- mrr >>- a battery backed clock that keeps time when the 'puter is off. >>- use of some internet accessible clock that you trust to set time on >>boot and keep time after boot >>- manually or magically setting the clock to the correct time on boot. There is a fourth way, if all he wants is a montonically increasing time, not necessarily connected with time in other parts of the universe. Which is what I interpret him to want. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 02:32 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20150417023248.67756e1f@ntlworld.com> |
| In reply to | #14573 |
On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 22:37:00 +0200 Morten Reistad <first@last.name> wrote: > In which case he needs to set a time that is higher than the last > access time on any file in the file system. If he uses ext3, 4, xfs > or jfs then there is journalling, and the file system is in a > consistent state when you get tl execute something late in the boot > process, like rc.local. > > The find/awk/ls/sort script to do this is left as an exercise to the > reader. (find most recently accessed file, do a stat on it, and set > the system time to 30 sec in the future from that.) > No need to go looking for a file timestamp - just touch a file (or write the date/time to a file) every 5 minutes, when you boot add 5 minutes to that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Unknown <dog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-25 23:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan.2015.04.25.23.10.16@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #14573 |
On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 22:37:00 +0200, Morten Reistad wrote:
> In article <j6knia997ndg4n6ufjecncb3g27cqhdb17@4ax.com>, Gordon Levi
> <gordon@address.invalid> wrote:
>>The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On 13/04/15 14:14, Joe Beanfish wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Please, just butt out of you have nothing to offer. You're worse than
>>>> the so-called troll. Same for the rest of ya, there's more blather by
>>>> you folk whining or being super-superior about the "troll" than
>>>> actual technical discussion about anything. Just shut up already. You
>>>> think you're so superior when you're just feeding the fire to get
>>>> your own names up in lights.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>If you want time and date to be meaningful - which may or may not be
>>>the case you have to ensure that they are accurate.
>>
>>The OP said, specifically, that he only wanted to keep "order". For that
>>purpose the time and date don't have to be meaningful.
>
> In which case he needs to set a time that is higher than the last access
> time on any file in the file system. If he uses ext3, 4, xfs or jfs then
> there is journalling, and the file system is in a consistent state when
> you get tl execute something late in the boot process, like rc.local.
>
> The find/awk/ls/sort script to do this is left as an exercise to the
> reader. (find most recently accessed file, do a stat on it, and set the
> system time to 30 sec in the future from that.)
>
> If the OP _really_ needs this I can see what I can dig up. I used to do
> this on an altos machine way back before NTP.
>
> -- mrr
>
>>>- a battery backed clock that keeps time when the 'puter is off. - use
>>>of some internet accessible clock that you trust to set time on boot
>>>and keep time after boot
>>>- manually or magically setting the clock to the correct time on boot.
>
> There is a fourth way, if all he wants is a montonically increasing
> time, not necessarily connected with time in other parts of the
> universe.
>
> Which is what I interpret him to want.
>
That is correct.
> -- mrr
How can a file become <unsequenced>?
Only by being written, when the rPi's time is less than the time-mark of
some other existing file/s.
JB's idea of marking each written file with the next available <natural
number:
positive integer>, would achieve the <put each handled paper on top>
effect.
But using the Files' ID for this is problematic; besides apparently the
rPi
<keeps time while it's running>.
The only problem is that <its clock stops> when it's powered-down.
AFAICS, provided each rPi-file-write updates the rPi's clock to not be
less
than the newest file, before it writes; the time-stamps will remain in
valid
sequence/order.
The only writes that the particular rPi 'job' does is like:
mv $1.ogg $1.ogx
so if cp was replaced by: Cp <update rPi's clock>; cp;
wouldn't this 'keep order'?
Looking at the big-picture of the system: rPi + PC
1. RTC-ed:PC ==Puts dataFiles to => rPi, with RealTime stamps;
2. rPi uses the dataFiles and marks their use-status by marking-their-
ID;
depending on the RealTimeStage of their usage.
eg. if power is cut while $1.ogg is playing, it becomes marked as z$1.ogg
and if power is cut during the short prompt after playing, it becomes
$1.ogx
So when rPi goes back to HQ/PC for <reloading and cleaning>, we need the
old & new *.og* not to be mixed i.t.o. their time stamps.
PS. isn't the rPi an educational project?
Who remembers: when UK brought out the mini-car, US advertisers spoke
about
a 'proper sizes car' [we can use a 2-ton V8 to go to the shop to buy 20
LuckyStrike, cos we've go the infinite frontier...then came toyota....]
WDYS?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-27 13:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mhlcls$hdq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14629 |
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 23:09:12 +0000, Unknown wrote: >>>The OP said, specifically, that he only wanted to keep "order". For >>>that purpose the time and date don't have to be meaningful. >> >> In which case he needs to set a time that is higher than the last >> access time on any file in the file system. If he uses ext3, 4, xfs or >> jfs then there is journalling, and the file system is in a consistent >> state when you get tl execute something late in the boot process, like >> rc.local. >> >> The find/awk/ls/sort script to do this is left as an exercise to the >> reader. (find most recently accessed file, do a stat on it, and set the >> system time to 30 sec in the future from that.) >> >> If the OP _really_ needs this I can see what I can dig up. I used to do >> this on an altos machine way back before NTP. >> >> -- mrr >> >> There is a fourth way, if all he wants is a montonically increasing >> time, not necessarily connected with time in other parts of the >> universe. >> >> Which is what I interpret him to want. >> > That is correct. > >> -- mrr > > > Looking at the big-picture of the system: rPi + PC > 1. RTC-ed:PC ==Puts dataFiles to => rPi, with RealTime stamps; > 2. rPi uses the dataFiles and marks their use-status by marking-their- > ID; Do step 1 with a method that doesn't copy timestamp and you should get the rPi's idea of the time which is always moving forward even if not close to real-time. So, say, for example use "scp" without "-p". Then files should time sequence in the order in which you copy them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-13 16:22 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504131617530.12728@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #14519 |
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, Joe Beanfish wrote: > On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 13:50:16 -0400, Michael Black wrote: > >> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, Unknown wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:20:06 +0000, Joe Beanfish wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 04:53:11 +0000, Unknown wrote: >>>>> So, back to the algorithm: >>>>> the mathematical concept 'order' [as emphasised in the "Subject:"] >>>>> is key. When Newton was called away from his desk of paper-work, he >>>>> needed the papers to be 'stacked' in the same ORDER when he >>>>> returned. >>>>> Even if the cleaning-lady, had 'been there' during his absence, and >>>>> <accessed the files>, provided the 'order' was maintained, the >>>>> real-time attributes were not needed. >>>> >>>> One option, forget the idea of timestamps entirely. Name the files >>>> with sequential numbers. Be sure to zero pad so ls works as expected. >>>> You could even do the Basic programming trick of skipping numbers >>>> (e.g. by 10s) so you could insert items higher in the queue without >>>> renumbering. >>>> >>>> 000000010-playme.mp3 000000020-thesis.mp3 000000030-soothing.mp3 >>>> 000000040-jamz.mp3 >>>> >>>> uh-oh, breaking news, add 000000000-sungoingnova.mp3 >>> >>> That's the kind if original good idea which we need !! >>> With the 'thread overflow' I nearly missed this 1 month old post. >>> I'll try to implement your idea, when I've cleared the chaos. >>> >> And the Raspberry Pi can't run without a Real Time Clock. >> >> You wasted all this time because you pretended to no know that. >> >> Linux needs to be interrupted to actually work, so keeping time is >> intrinsic to the operating system. >> >> Like I said way back when, all you have to do is set the time and date >> when you start the Pi up, something that used to be quite common. A >> hardware clock is only used to set the time when the computer starts, >> saving you a few keystrokes, the Pi or any Linux computer doesn't get >> time from the hardware clock other times (unless someone is configuring >> it differently, and a common thing then is to access a cesium standard >> on the internet, which would be another way do to this if the Pi is >> networked). >> >> You waste everyone's time, and now thing some roundabout method is >> "good", >> when it is all about you being too lazy to set the time when you turn on >> the computer. >> >> Michael > > If you had paid any attention to the complete problem you'd know there's > no way to enter the time on power up. Think of this as a home-brew > ipod nano with no buttons save power on/off. > No, I've been paying attention for years to this kid's postings. He comes up with a nominal problem, gets replies, but since he defined the problem wrong, he never gets a "suitable" answer, not that he really is looking for an answer. I replied once, then ignored the thread. Then it gets resurrected, and the stupid subject header "Keeping 'order' without RTC" is back staring at me. There's a "real time clock" it's inherent to the way Linux works. If he can't even get that right, then who's to believe any further problem he claims to have? If you have an actual question along these lines, then ask, don't rely on some fool to ask the question for you. Michael > Please, just butt out of you have nothing to offer. You're worse than > the so-called troll. Same for the rest of ya, there's more blather by > you folk whining or being super-superior about the "troll" than actual > technical discussion about anything. Just shut up already. You think > you're so superior when you're just feeding the fire to get your own > names up in lights. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-13 21:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <a8qoiat92mv8qq3c4224elg0014ep2bh46@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #14527 |
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 16:22:36 -0400, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> declaimed
the following:
>I replied once, then ignored the thread. Then it gets resurrected, and
>the stupid subject header "Keeping 'order' without RTC" is back staring at
>me. There's a "real time clock" it's inherent to the way Linux works.
>
Based on the Wikipedia entry -- "real time clock" matches my
interpretation of such... An independent, battery-backed, source of "wall
clock" time -- not a processor interrupt that counts in some fraction of
wall-clock units but stops running when the power goes away.
--
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
wlfraed@ix.netcom.com HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-13 21:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mghs02$3q2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14529 |
Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 16:22:36 -0400, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> declaimed
> the following:
>
>
>>I replied once, then ignored the thread. Then it gets resurrected, and
>>the stupid subject header "Keeping 'order' without RTC" is back staring at
>>me. There's a "real time clock" it's inherent to the way Linux works.
>>
> Based on the Wikipedia entry -- "real time clock" matches my
> interpretation of such... An independent, battery-backed, source of "wall
> clock" time -- not a processor interrupt that counts in some fraction of
> wall-clock units but stops running when the power goes away.
It doesn't exactly say battery-backed.
RTCs often have an alternate source of power, so they can continue to
^^^^^
keep time while the primary source of power is off or
unavailable. This alternate source of power is normally a lithium
battery in older systems, but some newer systems use a
supercapacitor, because they are rechargeable and can be
soldered.
I don't know if I read that as a RTC must be either a capacitor or
battery. Another alternative is just a counter where you set the
start time manually or from the internet.
Like the clock on a microwave oven or the clock on a cable box.
--
Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-14 09:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mgilau$8bf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14529 |
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 21:14:00 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > Based on the Wikipedia entry -- "real time clock" matches my > interpretation of such... An independent, battery-backed, source of > "wall clock" time -- not a processor interrupt that counts in some > fraction of wall-clock units but stops running when the power goes away. > If the RPi has a network connection the lack of a battery-backed RTC is somewhat irrelevant. You just install ntpd, the NTP time server, and configure it to start at boot time. On booting the RPi shows a date and time that is obviously a continuation from the dat and time when when it was last halted. It seems ntpd to take 2 - 3 minutes after the RPi was booted to get the correct time from its configured list of time sources and to reset the RPi's time source. So, using NTP in this way would do everything the OP wanted *provided that the RPi has a working network connection*. From re-reading the OP's initial posts it looks if this may not be the case. However, as this may not matter because an RPi running Raspbian appears to automatically set its clock to the time and date of its last shutdown when it boots.[1] This is good enough to meet the OP's stated requirement by including the timestamp in his filenames. [1] I haven't tested this without a copy of ntpd installed, but the observed behavior is consistent with this and is trivial to test on an RPi that doesn't have ntpd set up: I simply ran 'date' every 30 seconds or so. Initially it showed the time continuing from when I'd stopped the RPi last night and after 2-3 minutes to time stepped forward to match the laptop I'm using to write this. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-14 10:12 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mgilmn$bko$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #14535 |
On 14/04/15 10:06, Martin Gregorie wrote: > On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 21:14:00 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > >> Based on the Wikipedia entry -- "real time clock" matches my >> interpretation of such... An independent, battery-backed, source of >> "wall clock" time -- not a processor interrupt that counts in some >> fraction of wall-clock units but stops running when the power goes away. >> > If the RPi has a network connection >>>>>TO THE INTERNET!!!!!<<<<< the lack of a battery-backed RTC is > somewhat irrelevant. You just install ntpd, the NTP time server, and > configure it to start at boot time. On booting the RPi shows a date and > time that is obviously a continuation from the dat and time when when it > was last halted. It seems ntpd to take 2 - 3 minutes after the RPi was > booted to get the correct time from its configured list of time sources > and to reset the RPi's time source. > > So, using NTP in this way would do everything the OP wanted *provided > that the RPi has a working network connection*. From re-reading the OP's > initial posts it looks if this may not be the case. > > However, as this may not matter because an RPi running Raspbian appears > to automatically set its clock to the time and date of its last shutdown > when it boots.[1] > > This is good enough to meet the OP's stated requirement by including the > timestamp in his filenames. > > [1] I haven't tested this without a copy of ntpd installed, but the > observed behavior is consistent with this and is trivial to test on an > RPi that doesn't have ntpd set up: I simply ran 'date' every 30 seconds > or so. Initially it showed the time continuing from when I'd stopped the > RPi last night and after 2-3 minutes to time stepped forward to match the > laptop I'm using to write this. > > -- Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. – Erwin Knoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-14 10:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mgimkq$jh4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14536 |
On 14/04/2015 10:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 14/04/15 10:06, Martin Gregorie wrote: [] >> If the RPi has a network connection > > >>>>>TO THE INTERNET!!!!!<<<<< [] or to any local network running NTP with sufficient accuracy for the user. -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-14 12:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mgivqn$jus$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14536 |
On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 10:12:53 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> If the RPi has a network connection > > >>>>>TO THE INTERNET!!!!!<<<<< > Not necessarily. My house server runs ntpd and used an MSF[1] receiver as its external time source. My RPi, in turn uses the house server as its external time source. No internet connection needed. [1] a GPS receiver would be equally as good in the UK and obviously better in parts of the world that don't have MSF coverage. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-14 22:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mgk340$1jd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14529 |
In comp.os.linux.misc Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 16:22:36 -0400, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> declaimed > the following: > > >>I replied once, then ignored the thread. Then it gets resurrected, and >>the stupid subject header "Keeping 'order' without RTC" is back staring at >>me. There's a "real time clock" it's inherent to the way Linux works. >> > Based on the Wikipedia entry -- "real time clock" matches my > interpretation of such... An independent, battery-backed, source of "wall > clock" time -- not a processor interrupt that counts in some fraction of > wall-clock units but stops running when the power goes away. Which is also the Linux interpretation. The periodic interrupt is just called the clock or timer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-16 14:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504161340380.18103@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #14529 |
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 16:22:36 -0400, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> declaimed
> the following:
>
>
>> I replied once, then ignored the thread. Then it gets resurrected, and
>> the stupid subject header "Keeping 'order' without RTC" is back staring at
>> me. There's a "real time clock" it's inherent to the way Linux works.
>>
> Based on the Wikipedia entry -- "real time clock" matches my
> interpretation of such... An independent, battery-backed, source of "wall
> clock" time -- not a processor interrupt that counts in some fraction of
> wall-clock units but stops running when the power goes away.
And circa 1976 when Byte ran an article about a "Real Time Clock" there
was confusion too. "That's not a real clock" wrote one reader. I
remember at the time wondering how a software clock could be "real" but
then I wasn't looking at it properly.
From the 1975 Radio Shack Dictionary of Electronics (which was just a
repackaging of a dictionary from Howard W. Sams):
Real Time Clock: A clock that indicates the passage of actual time,
such as elapsed time in the flight of a missile, as opposed to some
fictitious time established by a computer program.
I know there was a time when home computers didn't keep track of time,
then when they did, it was via software interrupts. I don't know what was
done with mainframe and minicomputers.
My OSI superboard had no real time clock, I suppose I could have
implemented one, but at 2MHz I didn't want to interrupt things. My Radio
Shack Color Computer running Microware OS-9 thirty years ago had a real
time clock, using interrupts.
Sure, the definition can change since nowadays every computer has the
means of setting their software clocks via hardware.
But, I am nitpicking for two reasons. The first is the original poster of
this thread, who does this so often, misdirect things and then sits back
with all the answers. His problem, if it really exists, is not the lack
of an "RTC", but of a hardware clock. And even then, it's because he's
too lazy to set the time on startup.
The other is that I dont' see computers getting time from the hardware
clocks except at startup, or when deliberately told. The time is kept
with software, the real time clock (it is keeping track of real time).
It's not a perfect system, which is why Linux certainly has the means to
set the clock from the hardware clock, and all the interest in getting the
time over the internet.
But while hardware clocks have become standard, show me a computer that
keeps track of time only via a hardware clock.
Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-16 20:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mgp58b$puj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14577 |
On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 14:11:15 -0400, Michael Black wrote: > I know there was a time when home computers didn't keep track of time, > then when they did, it was via software interrupts. I don't know what > was done with mainframe and minicomputers. > In the 1960s and into the 70s IIRC some mainframes at least (ICL 1900, 2903) had to be told the date and time on boot. 1900 dates were simply a signed 24 bit number where zero was 31Dec1899 and times only resolved to the nearest second. By the end of the 70s I think most had a battery backed hardware clock (ICL 2900 certainly did). The 2900 hardware clock held date and time as a single integer accurate to the nearest microsecond: this was a sufficiently fine resolution to guarantee a unique file name if you included the timestamp as ccyymmddhhmmssmmmmmm in the file name. This was in fact used by the VME/B operating system whenever it needed a unique filename. My first microcomputer (a Hewart 6809 that I assembled fro a kit and which ran Flex 09) did not have a clock of any sort. You told it the when you booted Flex and it never did know what 'time of day' meant. I replaced that by a Gibbs Ultrascience board running OS-9 v2.3 on a 68008 chip. This was a co-processor board that lived in a PC's full length ISA slot. By this time PCs had 386 or 486 chip and a battery backed RTC, so OS-9 got the time and date from the PC's clock at boot time. That was in due course replaced by a Peripheral Technology motherboard running OS-9 v2.4 in a 68020 chip which, used an RTC clock chip with its own internal battery. > The other is that I dont' see computers getting time from the hardware > clocks except at startup, or when deliberately told. The time is kept > with software, the real time clock (it is keeping track of real time). > The main reason for doing it this way is that the clock chip can be very simple: it only needs to be a simple counter that ticks at the finest time resolution: in most older Linux systems this was a 1 millisecond tick rate, though since POSIX standardisation most standard library functions assume a microsecond tick rate. However, some functions that appeared with Linux kernel 2.6, e.g. futimens() and utimensat(), and were added to the POSIX standard in 2008 assume a nanosecond tick rate. This approach leaves the complex stuff that deals with leap years, different month lengths, day of week, time zones and daylight saving time etc. where it belongs - in software. > But while hardware clocks have become standard, show me a computer that > keeps track of time only via a hardware clock. > I'd say it depends on how its implemented: if the hardware clock can be mapped into memory address space there's little reason not to read it directly. OTOH, if the RTC clock hardware and/or the MPU chip's memory access hardware can't do that (in Intel terms it might have to read the clock through the Southbridge) then its is likely to be easier (and faster) to keep a copy of the clock in RAM. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-14 05:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mgi8bt$hc9$1@flea.killfile.org> |
| In reply to | #14510 |
In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504121346440.10384@darkstar.example.org>, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >And the Raspberry Pi can't run without a Real Time Clock. Yes it can. None of mine have an RTC. You can buy one on eBay for a few dollars. >You wasted all this time because you pretended to no know that. And you wasted a lot of time because you don't know what an RTC is. Hint: it isn't the software clock maintained by the OS.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-16 14:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504161412190.18103@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #14532 |
On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, Mark Kramer wrote: > In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504121346440.10384@darkstar.example.org>, > Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >> And the Raspberry Pi can't run without a Real Time Clock. > > Yes it can. None of mine have an RTC. > The software clock is keeping track of the real time, all you have to do is set it. > You can buy one on eBay for a few dollars. > >> You wasted all this time because you pretended to no know that. > > And you wasted a lot of time because you don't know what an RTC is. > Hint: it isn't the software clock maintained by the OS. > Go look in the past, and then tell me I'm wrong. Look for definitions that come before hardware clocks were common. Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-16 20:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mgp5ea$60a$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14578 |
In comp.os.linux.misc Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: > On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, Mark Kramer wrote: > >> In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504121346440.10384@darkstar.example.org>, >> Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >>> And the Raspberry Pi can't run without a Real Time Clock. >> >> Yes it can. None of mine have an RTC. >> > The software clock is keeping track of the real time, all you > have to do is set it. > >> You can buy one on eBay for a few dollars. >> >>> You wasted all this time because you pretended to no know that. >> >> And you wasted a lot of time because you don't know what an RTC is. >> Hint: it isn't the software clock maintained by the OS. >> > Go look in the past, and then tell me I'm wrong. > > Look for definitions that come before hardware clocks were common. > > Michael > In the Linux context, which is what we're discussing, you are, The kernel time keeping framework is called 'clk', it's the way the periodic timer interrupt gets generated, among other things. The RTC is the hardware that keeps track of external time and date specifically when the computer is powered off.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c28f62@TheWorld.com (Mark Kramer) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 03:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mi6pvj$hsu$1@flea.killfile.org> |
| In reply to | #14578 |
In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504161412190.18103@darkstar.example.org>, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, Mark Kramer wrote: > >> In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504121346440.10384@darkstar.example.org>, >> Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >>> And the Raspberry Pi can't run without a Real Time Clock. >> >> Yes it can. None of mine have an RTC. >> >The software clock is keeping track of the real time, all you >have to do is set it. The software clock is not an RTC. It counts interrupts. Yes, you can decode that count to a wallclock time, but that extra step is an extra step for a true RTC. >Go look in the past, and then tell me I'm wrong. I don't care what 1900 says, it's more than a century later and RTC has a meaning specific to computing. >Look for definitions that come before hardware clocks were common. I guess that maybe you don't realize that the "RTC" you think your OS maintains is really just a counter, and the the conversion to real time is done only upon request. It is a waste of time for the kernel to maintain the HHMMSSYYMMDD info that is "real time". If you believe that 1467829322 is a "real time", then your defintions are wrong. On the other hand, the true RTC devices do maintain the "real time". You can ask it directly "what hour of the day is it?" because its API returns hour of the day. You don't have to get a 32 or 64 bit integer and break it down or even know what the epoch that counter is based on is. Yes, if you are calling ctime or other "real time" function, that's what you are implicitly asking (unless you have a true RTC and library interface to that.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-04 04:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mi6tei$qmd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #14697 |
On 2015-05-04, Mark Kramer <c28f62@TheWorld.com> wrote: > In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504161412190.18103@darkstar.example.org>, > Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >>On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, Mark Kramer wrote: >> >>> In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1504121346440.10384@darkstar.example.org>, >>> Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: >>>> And the Raspberry Pi can't run without a Real Time Clock. >>> >>> Yes it can. None of mine have an RTC. >>> >>The software clock is keeping track of the real time, all you >>have to do is set it. > > The software clock is not an RTC. It counts interrupts. Yes, you can > decode that count to a wallclock time, but that extra step is an extra > step for a true RTC. Agreed. It counts "seconds" (well after it has been calibrated) but those are at best "seconds since the machine has been turned on". To have it count useful seconds (eg seconds since Jan 1 1970) you need to feed it the Real Time at one of those seconds. Taht is the job of the Real Time Clock. Note that the Real Time Clock also counts seconds. Seconds since epoch is a perfectly good time, just as Julian day is That does not need to be broken down into years months days, hours minutes seconds and fractions to be real time. > > I guess that maybe you don't realize that the "RTC" you think your > OS maintains is really just a counter, and the the conversion to real > time is done only upon request. It is a waste of time for the kernel to > maintain the HHMMSSYYMMDD info that is "real time". If you believe that > 1467829322 is a "real time", then your defintions are wrong. Seconds since epoch IS a "real time" Seconds since the computer was switched on is not. > > On the other hand, the true RTC devices do maintain the "real time". > You can ask it directly "what hour of the day is it?" because its API > returns hour of the day. You don't have to get a 32 or 64 bit integer and Actually intrnally it too just keeps count of seconds. There is a well defined algorithm to turn seconds since epoch into civil time. Your computer does it, that RTC does it. > break it down or even know what the epoch that counter is based on is. Yes, > if you are calling ctime or other "real time" function, that's what you > are implicitly asking (unless you have a true RTC and library interface > to that.) > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web