Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 19:35:35 -0700 From: Matthew Hunt <mph@astro.caltech.edu> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bidwatcher port Message-ID: <20030905023534.GA561@wopr.caltech.edu> In-Reply-To: <20030904134013.GA54877@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10309040209320.10078-100000@andrsn.stanford.edu> <20030904134013.GA54877@rot13.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 06:40:13AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > Also, you should contact the port maintainer to propose changes to the > port...that's what they're there for. Annelise did CC me (the maintainer) on her email about the port, I just haven't chimed in yet because I've been rearranging the office (including computer moves) all day. I don't have strong feelings either way about TIMEFUDGE. I agree with Annelise that it's kind of a dumb idea in the modern era of NTP timekeeping; at the very least, 5 minutes of slop is really a lot. OTOH, I'm not sure that it's the job of FreeBSD porters to make changes like these in an application's default behavior (going behind the author's back, as it were). Opinions? Matt -- Matthew Hunt <mph@astro.caltech.edu> * Eight lanes of shimmering cement from http://www.pobox.com/~mph/ * here to Pasadena!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030905023534.GA561>