From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Fri Jul 24 13:19:13 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 572749A9D92 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 13:19:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de) Received: from mx0.gentlemail.de (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8DAA1C97; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 13:19:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de) Received: from mh0.gentlemail.de (mh0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a135]) by mx0.gentlemail.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t6ODJA4P023897; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:19:10 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de) Received: from titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net (titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net [IPv6:2001:a60:f0bb:1::3:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh0.gentlemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 95440883; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:19:10 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <55B23B4E.1080400@omnilan.de> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:19:10 +0200 From: Harald Schmalzbauer Organization: OmniLAN User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; de-DE; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100906 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ian Lepore CC: Xin LI , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Will 10.2 also ship with a very stale NTP? References: <20150710235810.GA76134@rwpc16.gfn.riverwillow.net.au> <20150712032256.GB19305@satori.lan> <20150712050443.GA22240@server.rulingia.com> <20150712154416.b9f3713893fe28bfab1dd4d7@dec.sakura.ne.jp> <20150712184910.2d8d5f085ae659d5b9a2aba0@dec.sakura.ne.jp> <1436715703.1334.193.camel@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <1436715703.1334.193.camel@freebsd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig4A5B35E17751FBEE975CD82C" X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]); Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:19:11 +0200 (CEST) X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: mx0.gentlemail.de; Sender-ip: ; Sender-helo: mh0.gentlemail.de; ) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 13:19:13 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig4A5B35E17751FBEE975CD82C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bez=FCglich Ian Lepore's Nachricht vom 12.07.2015 17:41 (localtime): > And let's all just hope that a week or two of testing is enough when > jumping a major piece of software forward several years in its > independent evolution. =85 > I wonder how many other such things could be lurking in 4.2.8, waiting > to be triggered by other peoples' non-stock configurations? We've =85 I'd like to report one, most likely an upstream problem: 'restrict' definitions in ntp.conf(5) no longer work with unqualified DNS= names. A line like "restrict time1 nomodify nopeer noquery notrap" results in: ntpd[1913]: line 7 column 7 syntax error, unexpected T_Time1 ntpd[1913]: syntax error in /etc/ntp.conf line 7, column 7 I've always been using unqualified hostnames with 'restrict', and since d= efining 'server' with unqualified hostname still works, this seems to be = a significant bug to me. People are forced to change 'restrict' definitio= ns, but not to also change other unqualified definitions, which potential= ly leads to misconfigurations, since intentionally matching definitions c= an now differ easily. Has anybody already noticed this problem? And any idea if upstream is awa= re? > On Sun, 2015-07-12 at 18:49 +0900, Tomoaki AOKI wrote: >> Wow! Thanks for your time and quick response. >> I'm looking forward to seeing it MFCed. :-) >> >> On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 08:56:26 +0000 >> Xin LI wrote: >> >>> I've spent some time on the MFC, the testing would still take some ti= me >>> (likely a day or two) and once that's finished I'll ask re@ for appro= val. Thanks, -Harry --------------enig4A5B35E17751FBEE975CD82C Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlWyO04ACgkQLDqVQ9VXb8hsWgCgmN3OExFRm3VWixZXna9oA40x Px0An09FhqyzIFvgiQPmc1ZA7rctc+Jh =BMgA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig4A5B35E17751FBEE975CD82C--