e...@thyrsus.com said: >> I never figured out what the fs and ls were trying to tell me. Before the >> cleanup, the fs were probably converting ntp l_fp epoch times. > No, I don't think I changed those. Lost in the mists of time...
I was referring to my recent leap second cleanup. > Thanks. I've merged the first two functions and changed the third to use > proper RFC3339 format. I'd rewrite it more, but the function that was > fstostr has away of reporting out of range that is incompatible with the was > ctl_puts() wants to call it. You can remove that out of range check. ctl_pitfs is only called twice to print the time of the last leap second and the expiration time of the file. They should be sane. We can add a sanity check but there is already a checksum on the file. I'd be happy with strange looking printout as long as it doesn't crash. 64 bit time_t is going to have this problem all over the place. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
