We're preparing for a minor point release, probably 1.17, on or about
1 Aug.
Code freeze starts now. Bug fixes only,
--
http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond
"...The Bill of Rights is a literal and absolute document. The First
Amendment doesn't say you have a right to spea
Merge Request !1026 was merged
The Subject says "Converted stat_count struct to a module level global"
The code looks like it is un-struct-ing things.
Was that "a module level global" supposed to be "module level globals"?
What's the policy on this area? I thought the general idea was to put t
On 8/28/19 1:26 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
Merge Request !1026 was merged
The Subject says "Converted stat_count struct to a module level global"
The code looks like it is un-struct-ing things.
Was that "a module level global" supposed to be "module level globals"?
!1026 moves the variables fro
Thanks.
Ahh... Part of the problem is that I misread the diffs. I didn't notice that
the additions were procedures. I thought it was restoring the individual
counters.
ianbru...@gmail.com said:
> It is reducing unnecessary globals because globals are a good thing to
> reduce.
In general,
Yo Hal!
On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:56:33 -0700
Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> ianbru...@gmail.com said:
> > It is reducing unnecessary globals because globals are a good thing
> > to reduce.
>
> In general, I agree that reducing globals is a good idea. It's not
> globals that are evil, it's the c
Gary E. Miller via devel writes:
> I was not talking about strerror_r().
But this thread is about that exact function.
> I was talking about strnXXX()
> and struct ifreq.
If you talk about strnlen, it's not used in ntpsec (current master).
The other strnXXX functions are ANSI C and don't need a
Eric, there is a incompatibility break, so could we do 1.2.0 , please?
--
Sanjeev Gupta
+65 98551208 http://www.linkedin.com/in/ghane
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:47 AM Eric S. Raymond via devel
wrote:
> We're preparing for a minor point release, probably 1.17, on or about
> 1 Aug.
>
> Code
Sanjeev Gupta :
> Eric, there is a incompatibility break, so could we do 1.2.0 , please?
Mark's call. I beliecew he's considering shipping 1.2.0 shortly after.
--
http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond
___
devel mailing list
deve
Yo Sanjeev!
On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 07:15:56 +0800
Sanjeev Gupta via devel wrote:
> Eric, there is a incompatibility break, so could we do 1.2.0 , please?
What is the break?
RGDS
GARY
---
Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmingto
Yo Achim!
On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 22:17:43 +0200
Achim Gratz via devel wrote:
> Gary E. Miller via devel writes:
> > I was not talking about strerror_r().
>
> But this thread is about that exact function.
We'll have to disagree there. I feel it is much more generic to
the defines that pull in s
On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 5:24 PM Eric S. Raymond via devel
wrote:
> Sanjeev Gupta :
> > Eric, there is a incompatibility break, so could we do 1.2.0 , please?
>
> Mark's call. I beliecew he's considering shipping 1.2.0 shortly after.
My impression is that he is waiting for the IETF and IANA to
Gary, ALPN string checking. The commit mentioned that it would break with
previous NTPSec versions.
--
Sanjeev Gupta
+65 98551208 http://www.linkedin.com/in/ghane
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:28 AM Gary E. Miller via devel
wrote:
> Yo Sanjeev!
>
> On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 07:15:56 +0800
> Sanjee
Sanjeev Gupta said:
> Gary, ALPN string checking. The commit mentioned that it would break with
> previous NTPSec versions.
No. The client didn't check the returned ALPN string. It didn't even look to
see if there was a returned ALPN string.
I added that checking recently. It doesn't bail
Sanjeev Gupta via devel writes:
> Gary, ALPN string checking. The commit mentioned that it would break
> with previous NTPSec versions.
But it doesn't, because the returned protocol was not checked.
Otherwise it would have never worked in the first place.
Regards,
Achim.
--
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAV
Gary E. Miller via devel writes:
>> But this thread is about that exact function.
>
> We'll have to disagree there. I feel it is much more generic to
> the defines that pull in stuff.
THen change the subject or open your own thread, please.
>> > Not at all what I meant. Flexible about what NTPs
15 matches
Mail list logo
