From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 5 22:46:46 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D608B16A4BF for ; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 22:46:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp6.Stanford.EDU (smtp6.Stanford.EDU [171.67.16.33]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 045E84400E for ; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 22:46:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu) Received: from andrsn.stanford.edu (andrsn.Stanford.EDU [171.66.112.163]) by smtp6.Stanford.EDU (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h865kdhx027508; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 22:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (06050f32337f970385328cdaff28dd1f@localhost.stanford.edu [127.0.0.1]) by andrsn.stanford.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h865Zo9T019262; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 22:35:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 22:35:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Annelise Anderson To: Matthew Hunt In-Reply-To: <20030905161847.GA9081@wopr.caltech.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org cc: Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: Bidwatcher port X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 05:46:47 -0000 On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Matthew Hunt wrote: > On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 08:32:02PM -0700, Annelise Anderson wrote: > > > It was my impression that TIMEFUDGE is a product of the patch and is not > > in the original code. > > Sure, the term TIMEFUDGE does not appear in the source, but there is > a hard-coded 300 second delay. The point of adding TIMEFUDGE is to allow > you to change this to 0 or some other value, instead of being stuck with > 300. Take a look at the patch: > > - timeDiff += 5*60; > + timeDiff += TIMEFUDGE; > > This is around line 4346 of bidwatcher.cpp. The 5*60 second delay is > in the original code, it just doesn't have a name. > > > I've built it outside the ports collection at times and gotten no > > delay. > > The delay appears to be used if and only if the local clock cannot be > synchronized to the eBay clock. If the original code does not use a 300 s > fudge, it's because the clock was synchronized correctly. In that case > neither will the port. When TIMEFUDGE is set to 300, the original code > and the port's code work identically in all cases. > > Note that TIMEFUDGE (or the original code's hardcoded delay) are only > used if you see this message: > > showError("WARNING: Couldn't reach eBay, using local clock." > " Do not depend on times or sniping."); > > > Five minutes is enormous--it gives your opponents plenty of > > time to outbid you; and that's the whole idea of sniping--coming in > > at the end with a bid to which no one has time to respond. > > I agree. That's why I added TIMEFUDGE and even the comment: > > // In the era of accurate timekeeping, it's not clear that this is > // necessary, so we allow TIMEFUDGE to be set when building the > // FreeBSD port. -mph > > If you don't change TIMEFUDGE from 300, the behavior of the port is > identical to the original code. I gave the number a name (TIMEFUDGE) so > that you can set it to 0 for more sensible behavior. > > Matt > I agree then that it should be left just as it is. Annelise -- Annelise Anderson Author of: FreeBSD: An Open-Source Operating System for Your PC Available from: BSDmall.com and amazon.com Book Website: http://www.bittreepress.com/FreeBSD/introbook/