Re: ntpleapfetch regression.

2021-06-08 Thread James Browning via devel
On Tue, Jun 8, 2021, at 4:13 AM Hal Murray wrote: > > > Since you you seem to be against this I will drop it now. > > I didn't mean to be against anything. Sorry if it came across that way. > > Another list I'm on is having an "interesting" discussion about changing > something like this. I was

Re: ntpleapfetch regression.

2021-06-08 Thread Hal Murray via devel
> Since you you seem to be against this I will drop it now. I didn't mean to be against anything. Sorry if it came across that way. Another list I'm on is having an "interesting" discussion about changing something like this. I was trying to nudge us in the right direction, whereever that is.

Re: ntpleapfetch regression.

2021-06-07 Thread James Browning via devel
On Mon, Jun 7, 2021, at 12:14 PM Hal Murray via devel wrote: > > Mike Simpson said: > > Also, we are still trying to use /var/NTP for I believe NTS related logging. > > Can this be moved to /var/log/something as SELinux really doesn’t like it. > > nts or ntp/nts? > > /var/NTP/ is the default dir

Re: ntpleapfetch regression.

2021-06-07 Thread Mike Simpson via devel
Hi Hal. I believe /var/log for logging and /var/lib/ for data files is the expected behaviour I think from the latest edition of the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard > On 7 Jun 2021, at 20:14, Hal Murray via devel wrote: > > Mike Simpson said: >> Also, we are still trying to use /var/NTP for I

Re: ntpleapfetch regression.

2021-06-07 Thread Hal Murray via devel
Mike Simpson said: > Also, we are still trying to use /var/NTP for I believe NTS related logging. > Can this be moved to /var/log/something as SELinux really doesn’t like it. > nts or ntp/nts? /var/NTP/ is the default directory for all of ntpd's log files. You can override it in your config

Re: ntpleapfetch regression.

2021-06-07 Thread James Browning via devel
On Mon, Jun 7, 2021, at 8:44 AM Mike Simpson via devel wrote: > > Hi folks. > > Ntpleapfetch was coping with the leap-seconds.list file from the ietf for a > bit then it regressed back to being confused by the formatting of the > signature again. I see it. potential patch attached later. TLDR t