[CentOS] CentOs 5.6 and Time Sync

Mon Apr 25 19:47:46 UTC 2011
Denniston, Todd A CIV NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane <todd.denniston at navy.mil>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On
> Behalf Of Mailing List
> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 13:57
> To: CentOS mailing list
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOs 5.6 and Time Sync
> On 4/13/2011 7:35 AM, Mailing List wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >   I have upgraded my Dell C521 to the latest 5.6. I have always used
> > ntp to sync this machine and then the rest of the machines in the
> > network would sync from it. Since the update I cannot keep the right
> > time on the machine. This is with / without ntp. I have attempted
> > various scenario's with no luck. I am now trying the old kernel now

> > AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+
> > 3gb of ram.
> >
> > TIA.
> >
> > Brian.
>      List,
>      I was not able to resolve my issue with the time on this machine.
> I
> went ahead and rolled the update back to 5.5 and disabled the update
> 5.6.
>     What I would like to know is if CentOS 6 might be ok when it rolls
> out, or am I just going to have to keep with 5.5 till EOL?
>    Thanks to all with there help.

1) I hope you are only talking about having rolled back to the last
working for you kernel from 5.5, not the whole distribution.

2) If I was in your position and had time, my method would be[1] 
 a) get the srpm for the last known working kernel (2.6.18-194.32 ???)
 b) get the srpm for the first known not working kernel (2.6.18-238 ???)
 c) expand each of the above srpms into their own rpm build tree 
    i.e., rpmdev-setuptree;rpm -i kern1; mv rpmbuild rpmbuild.kern1; 
          rpmdev-setuptree;rpm -i kern2; mv rpmbuild rpmbuild.kern2
 d) start looking at the differences in the patches applied in kern1 vs.
those in kern2, i.e., read/diff the kernel.spec files
   see if there were any new ones that seemed likely to be causing the
   RTFS if necessary to make better guesses.
   Rebuild kernel 2 with patches taken out/modified based on my
investigations and test them and see if I guessed right.
   If no luck, think about opening an TUV bug with lots of the info you
have sent here, they may be interested even if you don't have a

[1] Been there, done that: