Yo Royce!
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:50:39 -0900
Royce Williams wrote:
> > Nothing we do says an admin can't "rm /usr/bin/XXX". I often have
> > that in my build scripts. No need to clutter the build options for
> > that.
>
> Bespoke downstream file removal has its place -- but there's a
> brea
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Gary E. Miller wrote:
> Yo Royce!
>
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:38:04 -0900
> Royce Williams wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Gary E. Miller
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Yo Achim!
>> >
>> > On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:21:01 +0100
>> > Achim Gratz wrote:
>> >
>> > >
Yo Hal!
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 13:26:54 -0800
Hal Murray wrote:
> Gary said:
> >> 2) It drags in a big pile of stuff, starting with gnuplot.
> > No.
>
> At least one of us is confused.
>
> buildprep installs gnuplot unconditionally. Perhaps you mean that it
> doesn't need to do that. But cu
g...@rellim.com said:
> I'm unaware of anything in NTPsec that does things behind anyone's back.
>> Does it start a server? Does it run a cron job? Does it install
>> hooks that some code I do need might call?
> Now I'm really lost. I'm unaware of anything in NTPsec does any of that
> without
strom...@nexgo.de said:
> Like the NMEA clock: day, time of day, clock ID, timecode (optionally maybe
> the decoded time and flags from the timecode).
There are two approaches to logging clockstats info.
As background, the assumption is that you don't want to log everything.
You can log stuff
Gary said:
>> 2) It drags in a big pile of stuff, starting with gnuplot.
> No.
At least one of us is confused.
buildprep installs gnuplot unconditionally. Perhaps you mean that it doesn't
need to do that. But currently it does.
What does ntpviz do without gnuplot and/or why would I want to d
Yo Royce!
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:38:04 -0900
Royce Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Gary E. Miller
> wrote:
> >
> > Yo Achim!
> >
> > On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:21:01 +0100
> > Achim Gratz wrote:
> >
> > > Gary E. Miller writes:
> > > > Mark was thinking of a separate ntp-to
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Gary E. Miller wrote:
>
> Yo Achim!
>
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:21:01 +0100
> Achim Gratz wrote:
>
> > Gary E. Miller writes:
> > > Mark was thinking of a separate ntp-tools package or option. Many
> > > distros has a X package and a matching X-tools package. We
Yo Achim!
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:21:01 +0100
Achim Gratz wrote:
> Gary E. Miller writes:
> > Mark was thinking of a separate ntp-tools package or option. Many
> > distros has a X package and a matching X-tools package. We could
> > make that easy with a build option.
> >
> > I see the vast maj
Yo Hal!
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 04:09:13 -0800
Hal Murray wrote:
> We (at least I) want the extra precision so we can tell how bad
> abusive clients are. I sent something saying that, but it didn't
> make it to the issue tracker.
+1
RGDS
GARY
-
Achim Gratz :
> Just out of curiosity, why have you defined the l_fp access macros in
> such an overly redundant manner? I realize that the compiler will
> optimize most of that away, but it seems odd to do that in the first
> place unless you're expecting to support a platform that has a
> non-co
Just out of curiosity, why have you defined the l_fp access macros in
such an overly redundant manner? I realize that the compiler will
optimize most of that away, but it seems odd to do that in the first
place unless you're expecting to support a platform that has a
non-conforming compiler that d
Achim Gratz :
> Achim Gratz writes:
> […]
> > Just out of curiosity, why have you defined the lfp access macros in
> > such an overly redundant manner?
> […]
>
> The lack of responses makes me wonder if it was a bad idea to tuck that
> section after the patch… any insights? :-)
Sorry, please r-s
Achim Gratz writes:
[…]
> Just out of curiosity, why have you defined the lfp access macros in
> such an overly redundant manner?
[…]
The lack of responses makes me wonder if it was a bad idea to tuck that
section after the patch… any insights? :-)
Regards,
Achim.
--
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+30
Gary E. Miller writes:
> Mark was thinking of a separate ntp-tools package or option. Many
> distros has a X package and a matching X-tools package. We could make
> that easy with a build option.
>
> I see the vast majority of users only using ntpd.
>
> But seriously, do you really need to save U
I just published "TESTFRAME: The epic failure" on the NTPsec blog. I
have only one entry left in my queue, on our documentation practice.
So far I've written about 75% of the content. I'd like the blog not
to be mostly the ESR show. This means it's time for others to step up.
--
I can't figure out what's going on.
I claim the issue was bogus. The code as it was before your change was
correct.
We (at least I) want the extra precision so we can tell how bad abusive
clients are. I sent something saying that, but it didn't make it to the
issue tracker.
Subj
17 matches
Mail list logo
