On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 15:44:46 +0100 Zefram <[email protected]> wrote: > Roger Shimizu wrote: > >See: > >https://github.com/rogers0/adjtimex/blob/master/debian/patches/07-update-manpage-adjtimex.8.patch > > That only has a small overlap with my patch. Most of my patch is still > applicable.
True.
I already applied your patch with slightly modification in my local tree.
> >I guess "usec or nsec" is still confusing to end-user.
>
> That's why I added the parenthetical "using whichever unit the clock is
> presently denominated in". If any more explanation is required than
> that and the description of the status flag, it should be brought out
> as a separate paragraph, not squeezed into the option descriptions.
Understand.
> >But please add new lines for new stuff.
>
> That doesn't sit well with what I want to achieve. I'm thinking that
> I'd like to make the -p output look something like
>
> offset: 5221897 ns
> frequency: 5733637 /65536 us/s
> maxerror: 616511 us
> esterror: 9673 us
> status: STA_PLL | STA_NANO
> time_constant: 10 Sh
> precision: 1 us
> tolerance: 32768000 /65536 us/s
> tick: 9999 us
> raw time: 1492784129.037972432
> return value: TIME_OK
>
> Most of the new stuff is units, and I don't see a reasonable layout
> that puts that all on new lines. But in most cases the existing number
> is still whitespace-delimited and the first thing following the colon,
> so it's still easy to parse out in a backward-compatible way. What do
> you think?
I meant we may have:
status: 8193
status flag: STA_PLL | STA_NANO
Don't you think it keeps both the old format and the new format you proposed?
Cheers,
--
Roger Shimizu, GMT +9 Tokyo
PGP/GPG: 4096R/6C6ACD6417B3ACB1
pgpKsaLA5kcxa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
