Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 09:41:43 -0600 From: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> To: Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Will 10.2 also ship with a very stale NTP? Message-ID: <1436715703.1334.193.camel@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20150712184910.2d8d5f085ae659d5b9a2aba0@dec.sakura.ne.jp> References: <20150710235810.GA76134@rwpc16.gfn.riverwillow.net.au> <20150712032256.GB19305@satori.lan> <20150712050443.GA22240@server.rulingia.com> <20150712154416.b9f3713893fe28bfab1dd4d7@dec.sakura.ne.jp> <CAGMYy3vKEUCD=Ssxt%2B2Vny4eQ7CNQHTxNKncyQnRk5dPQU6ZtA@mail.gmail.com> <20150712184910.2d8d5f085ae659d5b9a2aba0@dec.sakura.ne.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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. The import of 4.2.8p2 several months ago resulted in complete failure of timekeeping on all my arm systems. Just last week I tracked it down to a kernel bug (which I haven't committed the fix for yet). While the bug has been in the kernel for years, it tooks a small change in ntpd behavior to trigger it. Granted it's an odd corner-case problem that won't affect most users because they just use the stock ntp.conf file (and it only affects systems that have a large time step due to no battery-backed clock). But it took me weeks to find enough time to track down the cause of the problem. 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 already had one report for 4.2.8p3 of someone's GPS refclock not working after the update. -- Ian 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 <delphij@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I've spent some time on the MFC, the testing would still take some time > > (likely a day or two) and once that's finished I'll ask re@ for approval. > > On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 11:44 PM Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp> > > wrote: > > > > > As I already mentioned in another post, head has 4.2.8 p3 in-tree. > > > > > > So the answer should be MFC before creation of releng/10.2 is planned > > > or not. > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:04:43 +1000 > > > Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On 2015-Jul-11 23:22:56 -0400, Chris Nehren < > > > cnehren+freebsd-stable@pobox.com> wrote: > > > > >On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 09:58:11 +1000, John Marshall wrote: > > > > >> It's me again with my annual NTP whinge. > > > > > > > > > >The answer to the perennial "will release $foo ship with old / insecure > > > > >/ otherwise deficient $bar?" is still "install $bar from ports". > > > > > > > > That's a non-answer. It just changes the question to "why bother to > > > > include $bar in base when I need to install the port anyway". > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Peter Jeremy > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Tomoaki AOKI junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp > > > _______________________________________________ > > > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1436715703.1334.193.camel>