Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 15:20:01 +1100 From: John Marshall <john.marshall@riverwillow.com.au> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Stale NTP in FreeBSD Message-ID: <20131028042000.GA1455@rwpc15.gfn.riverwillow.net.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Apologies if this is the wrong mailing list but no list in particular seems appropriate. I was disappointed to discover in the 9.2-RC's that ntpd was still 4.2.4p8. I notice that that same (legacy) ntpd version is in stable/10 and, presumably, likely to end up in the new 10.0 release; so I thought I should speak up in the hope that it is not yet too late for the current ntpd stable release to be included. 2006-12-28 ntpd 4.2.4 released 2008-08-21 ntpd 4.2.4p5 released 2008-08-23 FreeBSD imports ntpd 4.2.4p5 to head 2009-01-04 FreeBSD 7.1-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p5) 2009-05-04 FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p5) 2009-11-25 FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p5) 2009-12-08 ntpd 4.2.4p8 released 2009-12-12 ntpd 4.2.6 released 2009-12-16 FreeBSD imports ntpd 4.2.4p8 to head 2010-03-23 FreeBSD 7.3-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p5) 2010-07-23 FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p5) 2011-02-24 FreeBSD 7.4-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p5) 2011-02-24 FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p5) 2011-12-24 ntpd 4.2.6p5 released <------------- current ntpd STABLE 2012-01-10 FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p8) 2012-04-18 FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p5) 2012-12-30 FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p8) 2013-06-09 FreeBSD 8.4-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p5) 2013-09-30 FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE (with ntpd 4.2.4p8) [soon] FreeBSD 10.0-RELEASE (still with ntpd 4.2.4p8?) rwpc15> cd /usr/src && svn cat ^/stable/10/contrib/ntp/version.m4 m4_define([VERSION_NUMBER],[4.2.4p8]) The version of ntp in FreeBSD has been 'legacy' since December 2009 (almost 4 years ago). Is there a technical reason why we are stuck at 4.2.4 or is it simply lack of volunteer resources? Perhaps ntp (and some of the other imported software in the base) is just not on anybody's RADAR? I know I can "use the port" if I want a current version of ntp, but I can't see the point of shipping superseded stuff in the base without good reason. Would it be asking to much for re@ to include, as part of its release planning, a review of just how current the vendor imports are? Perhaps this is already part of the process? Thank you for listening :-) --=20 John Marshall --nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.21 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlJt5fAACgkQw/tAaKKahKJZ8ACfSdNqCOVFuC5XuhN6sHIc2jNN SSQAnAt3aNmSaqRyT5+NNq7zxuCQU1NT =wWpp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131028042000.GA1455>