> Attempted port fix pushed. Please test.
Missing the _H on HAVE_SYS_CLOCKCTL
Fix pushed. More testing in the pipeline.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel mailing list
devel@ntpsec.org
http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Hal Murray :
> Should we add HAVE_SYS_CLOCKCTL to waf, or just test for __NetBSD__?
I just did the former.
--
http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond
___
devel mailing list
devel@ntpsec.org
http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/de
matthew.sel...@twosigma.com said:
> NetBSD should be using the clockctl interface:
> http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi?clockctl+4.i386+NetBSD-7.0
Thanks.
Eric, I should probably fix it since I have a test case.
Should we add HAVE_SYS_CLOCKCTL to waf, or just test for __NetBSD__?
--
These
Matthew Selsky :
> On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 09:20:54PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> > Hal Murray :
> > > On NetBSD:
> > > 07-06T15:42:17 ntpd[4940]: root can't be dropped due to missing
> > > capabilities.
> >
> > So don't do that, then. Drop root, I mean. Without some equivalent of Linux
> >
On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 09:20:54PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Hal Murray :
> > On NetBSD:
> > 07-06T15:42:17 ntpd[4940]: root can't be dropped due to missing
> > capabilities.
>
> So don't do that, then. Drop root, I mean. Without some equivalent of Linux
> or Solaris fine-grained privilege
Hal Murray :
> On NetBSD:
> 07-06T15:42:17 ntpd[4940]: root can't be dropped due to missing capabilities.
So don't do that, then. Drop root, I mean. Without some equivalent of Linux
or Solaris fine-grained privilege control, setting the clock won't work
afterwards.
What has NetBSD been doing bef
On NetBSD:
07-06T15:42:17 ntpd[4940]: root can't be dropped due to missing capabilities.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel mailing list
devel@ntpsec.org
http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
