A cleanup opportunity.
fstostr in ntp_util only called from within ntp_util but defined in ntpd.h
%04d%02d%02d%02d%02d
lstostr in ntp_leapsec only called from within ntp_leapsec
%04d-%02d-%02dT%02d:%02dZ
ctl_putfs in ntp_control only called from within ntp_control
%04d%02d%02d%02d%02d
I ne
I won't be surprised if there are bugs/problems.
It runs on Linux. I haven't actually tested any leap seconds.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel mailing list
devel@ntpsec.org
http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
g...@rellim.com said:
> So, any preferences for different and dsescription names that do not
> conflict with the misleading *BSD names?
I don't have any good suggestions.
I'd probably try a functional notation:
x = sec2ns(y)
It needs another something to distinguish integers from floating poi
Yo Hal!
On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 20:28:40 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
> ../../include/timespecops.h:65:9: warning: 'NANOSECOND' macro
> redefined [-Wmacro-redefined]
>
> NetBSD:
> /usr/include/sys/timex.h:#define NANOSECOND 10L /*
> nanoseconds in one second */
>
> FreeBSD:
> /usr/include/s
../../include/timespecops.h:65:9: warning: 'NANOSECOND' macro redefined
[-Wmacro-redefined]
NetBSD:
/usr/include/sys/timex.h:#define NANOSECOND 10L /* nanoseconds in
one second */
FreeBSD:
/usr/include/sys/timex.h:#define NANOSECOND 10L /* nanoseconds in
one second */
./waf configure --out=xxx
saves the xxx someplace. Following waf builds or checks use that directory.
I'd like to have more than one directory in-progress at the same time and
switch to the desired one. Is that possible? How?
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
A lot of useful work has gone into NTPsec since the 0.9.6 release on
2016-12-30, and we have some good momentum right now, which we want to
demonstrate.
To that end, I would like to cut the 0.9.7 release a week from today, on
2017-03-21.
..m
___
devel m
Hal Murray writes:
> Is the world going to shift to 64 bit time_t soon enough? Or should I
> convert everything to time64_t now while the code is somewhat fresh in my
> mind. Actually, I think I would debug the non64 case first, then update to
> time64_t.
As far as NTP is concerned, I think a
Yo Hal!
On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 12:09:34 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
> g...@rellim.com said:
> > On the flip side, when a RasPi zero is $5 retail qty/1 no need to
> > worry about compute power in the coffee pot.
>
> I think that depends on your target market. If you are selling a
> hand polished go
g...@rellim.com said:
> On the flip side, when a RasPi zero is $5 retail qty/1 no need to worry
> about compute power in the coffee pot.
I think that depends on your target market. If you are selling a hand
polished gold plated coffee pot, it probably doesn't matter.
At high volumes, if I can
Yo Eric!
On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 22:41:44 -0400
"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
> Daniel Franke :
> > I question this prediction. I expect there to be plenty of
> > *newly-manufactured* 32-bit embedded systems for the indefinite
> > future, well beyond 2038. Nobody needs or wants 64 bits to control a
> > c
https://developers.google.com/time/smear#standardsmear
On Mar 14, 2017 7:25 AM, "Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
> Hal Murray :
> > It will take me a day or two to clean things up and test some more.
>
> Looking forward to the patch.
>
> > We need to figure out how to test leap seconds.
> >
> > In parti
Hal Murray :
> It will take me a day or two to clean things up and test some more.
Looking forward to the patch.
> We need to figure out how to test leap seconds.
>
> In particular, we need to test the smearing stuff. It's currently using cos.
> I think google and friends switched to simple l
> I think we can hang with Plan A for now.
Sounds good to me.
I think I have all the leap stuff converted.
I had troubles with one test until I figured out that it was testing a
feature that I didn't understand and had removed. There was an option to
skip loading leap seconds that were older
14 matches
Mail list logo
