On Mon, 5 Jul 2004, Patrick Welche wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 05, 2004 at 04:30:33AM -0500, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> > Hey, is your frequency changed after clock.c 1.83-1.84? My best
> > timekeeper fell from ~157 to ~143 in 8 hours, and still falling.
> > That's not bad, by itself, but together with the "too stiff" issue,
> > it could lead to more problem reports.
>
> I don't know what it used to be..

> So the older (1.6F up for 70 days) box has a higher frequency (9) than the
> new since yesterday box (5), but given they are 2 orders of magnitude
> lower than your ~150, either we are talking different frequencies, or
> my data isn't significant..

You expect large variation from machine to machine; it's just that
people notice when it changes on the same machine, plus, it could
contribute to problems (until things settle down). We'll see if
anybody else notices.

Frederick