Bug 1155556
| Summary: | Error in example on man page makes it very confusing | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Quentin Armitage <quentin> | ||||
| Component: | adjtimex | Assignee: | Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | unspecified | ||||||
| Version: | 21 | CC: | mlichvar | ||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
| Last Closed: | 2014-10-29 11:49:37 UTC | Type: | Bug | ||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
Thanks for the report. I've asked the upstream maintainer to include the patch. Looking at this again, I think the text in the man page is actually correct. The uncorrected clock gains 8 seconds per day, so when the tick is set to 9999, it will lose 0.64 seconds per days (8 - 8.64), which is then corrected by setting the frequency. Do you agree? On reading it again in the light of your comment 2, I agree with you that the man page is correct. I think I was interpreting it as after the tick was set to 9999, it would lose 0.64 seconds relative to the speed it had previously been running. I wonder if it would be clearer to say: If your system clock gained 8 seconds in 24 hours, you could set the tick to 9999, and then it would lose 8.64 seconds per day relative to its previous speed, or 0.64 seconds a day relative to actual time (that is, 1 tick unit = 8.64 seconds per day). With apologies for the incorrect report. Ok, thanks. I'm closing this bug. |
Created attachment 949347 [details] Patch to correct man page Description of problem: Under Examples at the end of adjtimex.8 man page, it says "... set the tick to 9999, and then it would lose 0.64 seconds per day". It should be "... it would lose 8.64 seconds per day". This is even more confusing since 0.64 is the residual error, which needs to be corrected by using --frequency. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): adjtimex-1.29 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. man 8 adjtimex 2. 3. Actual results: "... it would lose 0.64 seconds per day". Expected results: "... it would lose 8.64 seconds per day". Additional info: Patch attached