Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 17:18:43 -0800 From: Studded <Studded@san.rr.com> To: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net> Cc: FreeBSD-Stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Things I'd like to see in 2.2.6 Message-ID: <34EE2B73.BCDD3D78@san.rr.com> References: <l03130303b11380fee173@[208.2.87.4]> <l03130300b113aab6ae9b@[208.2.87.4]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Richard Wackerbarth wrote: > > At 2:10 PM -0600 2/20/98, Studded wrote: > > I'm not familiar with 'ntp-4.0.72'. Where did you get it? > Same site. Ah, thanks. I had assumed that they'd put the most recent version on their www page. The ntp-4.0.72 archive is the NTP protocol 4 implementation, whereas the other is protocol 3. The chief advantage of version 4 seems to be that it uses floating point math for smaller binary size and greater efficiency. The one possible disadvantage would be that they've shifted from xntpd to ntpd, so it would require a bit of shuffling in /etc/rc.conf and rc.network, basically adding an option for ntpd. They claim backwards compatability, so it's very likely that other problems could be averted by adding a symlink for xntpd that points to the new ntpd. Thank you for pointing this out, I'd say you've uncovered another good reason to update. :) > > I got xntpd > >3-5.92 from the site listed above, and based on the file structure of > >the sources in that file it appears to be the successor to what we have > >in our tree. And I didn't need to edit anything in the xntpd archive I > >installed, it just had a few minor compiler warnings, mostly related to > >discarding const info. > > Well, if you had read the instructions that came with it, they said to ignore > such warnings because they were expected (and with work, will eventually > be eliminated) but do not represent any real problems. Pardon me if I misunderstood, but I read that response as hostile. I did read the documentation, and I took pains to indicate that there were no big problems. I'm sorry if I didn't make myself sufficiently clear. I wanted anyone who took the project on to know that there were some small nits that might need to be worked out since I don't have enough programming experience to know if they matter or not, and I'd like to think that the project would prefer to ship code that compiles without warnings. Thanks for looking into this, Doug -- *** Chief Operations Officer, DALnet IRC network *** *** Proud operator, designer and maintainer of the world's largest *** Internet Relay Chat server. 5,328 clients and still growing. *** Try spider.dal.net on ports 6662-4 (Powered by FreeBSD) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?34EE2B73.BCDD3D78>