Yo Hal!
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 23:27:03 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
> I assume that is work in progress rather than something I did.
Warnings, not errors.
You should only get those if you have --enable-debug
I started out with over a thousand, now just over 100 hundred left to
fix.
Feel free to fix
I assume that is work in progress rather than something I did.
samples:
test-all/test.log:../../libisc/error.c:28:50: warning: initialization
left-hand side might be a candidate for a format attribute
[-Wsuggest-attribute=format]
test-all/test.log:../../libisc/error.c:29:45: warning: initializat
Gary E. Miller writes:
> That because a float is only 21 significant digits, the same significant
> digits as in 7C00
Nope, a float has 24 binary digits for the mantissa (including the
hidden bit), unless they changed the standard while I wasn't looking.
So there really isn't an explanation of
Hal Murray writes:
> I fatfingered something while trying to pull before I could push. Mumble.
> It will take me a while to sort things out.
Just check your reflog and go back to the state before the pull.
Regards,
Achim.
--
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>
There is lots of extra/debugging logging
Bugs/quirks in DNS area:
It needs good backoff
I think we can simplify things if FLAG_DNS is set on the pool too
findinterface needs work. I've seen it return a an interface without an
IPv6 address
The callback API might get cleaner if passes IP
I fatfingered something while trying to pull before I could push. Mumble.
It will take me a while to sort things out.
Eric: Please add this as another vote for a how-to-use-git paper.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel mailing l
Yo Hal!
More info on the NetBSD bug:
TEST(lfpfunc, FDF_RoundTrip)../../tests/libntp/lfpfunc.c:268::FAIL: Expected
0.0 Was 2147482624.0. 2147483647.50 diff 2147482624.00 not within
2.384186e-07
2147483647 is hex: 7FFF
2147482624 is hex: 7C00
If you know your floaing point you k
Yo Hal!
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:33:11 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
> I'm still seeing this on NetBSD. Does anybody understand this one?
> Is it a real error or a testing glitch?
A real bug, on just NetBSD. I'm still working on it.
For some reason it looks like NetBSD floating point is not as accur
Hal Murray :
>
> My plan is to push when I get back in several hours unless somebody objects
> or my testing finds something.
>
> I think it's working. I'll be doing more testing while I'm out. There is,
> of course, a chance I've broken something with a change this big.
Once you've pushed u
My plan is to push when I get back in several hours unless somebody objects
or my testing finds something.
I think it's working. I'll be doing more testing while I'm out. There is,
of course, a chance I've broken something with a change this big.
I'm still seeing this on NetBSD. Does anybo
Yo Hal!
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:25:27 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
> I forgot to mention that there are two uses for the document I'm
> looking for.
>
> One is to compare what we have with ntp classic.
> The other is to understand the code.
Since you seem to understand the code the best, I guess you
> Wow, it does sound pretty Rube Goldberg the way you describe it.
I think that's why it took me so long to figure it out.
I forgot to mention that there are two uses for the document I'm looking for.
One is to compare what we have with ntp classic.
The other is to understand the code.
--
The
Yo Hal!
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 12:58:09 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
> g...@rellim.com said:
> >> I think we need a chart/table showing the types of packets we send
> >> and expect to receive.
> > How about the RFC? I would hate to duplicate that.
>
> No, that's not what I'm looking for.
>
> We
g...@rellim.com said:
>> I think we need a chart/table showing the types of packets we send
>> and expect to receive.
> How about the RFC? I would hate to duplicate that.
No, that's not what I'm looking for.
We only implement a subset of the full spec. For example, we don't implement
the pee
Yes, it is mergeable.And it is better than head.
I de-wipped and it is rebasingas I type.
Logging is just a try/except block catching the unicode error, then
dumps with print(repr(foo)), then re-raises the error. So the traceback
still happens.
On 04/13/2017 11:13 AM, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Yo Ian!
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 11:06:37 -0500
Ian Bruene wrote:
> I pushed a patch for most of the bugs, but I haven't been able to
> replicate the unicode
> bug yet so I added some temporary logging to the relevant function.
I can't Merge a WIP, is it ready to push? Is it better than current
gi
oY Gene!
I pushed a patch for most of the bugs, but I haven't been able to
replicate the unicode
bug yet so I added some temporary logging to the relevant function.
--
In the end; what separates a Man, from a Slave? Money? Power?
No. A Man Chooses, a Slave Obeys. -- Andrew Ryan
Yo Trevor!
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 00:40:54 -0400
"Trevor N." wrote:
> Sorry about that, I didn't test the change well enough. Without this
> patch the warning flag added to the list needs to also be added down
> where the other conditional warning flags are added to CFLAGS.
Actually, they need to
Yo Hal!
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 00:45:07 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
> I think we need a chart/table showing the types of packets we send
> and expect to receive.
How about the RFC? I would hate to duplicate that.
https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5905.txt
> And another table of the config commands and th
I think we need a chart/table showing the types of packets we send and expect
to receive.
And another table of the config commands and the packets they
generate/process.
Maybe there should be notes about the meaning of the old/classic
types/commands that we no longer support.
--
I f
20 matches
Mail list logo
