Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
Brian Inglis wrote: On 2015-01-12 00:32, Harlan Stenn wrote: Brian Inglis writes: Current OpenSSL version is 1.0.1k since maintenance improved after Heartbleed encouraged LF/CII and others to fund OpenSSL. Which OpenSSL version is currently required? Any way that support of updated OpenSSL versions by ntpd could be improved? You're talking about the windows version, right? Yes, as that appears to have issues using updated releases: On 2015-01-10 11:13, Martin Burnicki wrote: Please note that beside the NTP binaries you also need the openssl DLL in the version against which the binaries have been built, otherwise ntpd fails to start. as I tried to update with previous stable, found this problem, and had to revert. Which previous stable do you mean? ntpd or openSSL? Ntpd does a version check of the openSSL DLL/shared object library when it starts. It compares the version of the library available on the host system at runtime to the version of the library used at compilation time. If I remember correctly then this check accepts only patch levels, i.e. if ntpd has been compiled against openSSL v1.0.1j it will accept all openSSL v1.0.1* versions, e.g. v1.0.1k, but it should refuse to start with openSSL v1.0.0*. Sounds reasonable to me. I've just verified that the ntpd v4.2.8 compiled by me against openSSL 1.0.1j also works if I replace openssl by v1.0.1k. Martin -- Martin Burnicki Meinberg Funkuhren Bad Pyrmont Germany ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 2015-01-12 00:32, Harlan Stenn wrote: Brian Inglis writes: Current OpenSSL version is 1.0.1k since maintenance improved after Heartbleed encouraged LF/CII and others to fund OpenSSL. Which OpenSSL version is currently required? Any way that support of updated OpenSSL versions by ntpd could be improved? You're talking about the windows version, right? Yes, as that appears to have issues using updated releases: On 2015-01-10 11:13, Martin Burnicki wrote: Please note that beside the NTP binaries you also need the openssl DLL in the version against which the binaries have been built, otherwise ntpd fails to start. as I tried to update with previous stable, found this problem, and had to revert. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 11/01/2015 21:00, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: [] To stop your inklings I've just wanted to integrate ntp client with my own software into common installer. Now I'm not convinced it was good idea, likely not. A lot of ntp's versions could make me more work every time and thus it doesn't help user who installs my software. best regards Johny Faced with a similar problem, we just tell the users that NTP must be installed and point to the instructions here: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/setup.html You are welcome to point to the same page, should you wish. -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 1/12/2015 3:24 AM, Guy wrote: Brian Inglis wrote: On 2015-01-10 11:13, Martin Burnicki wrote: Please note that beside the NTP binaries you also need the openssl DLL in the version against which the binaries have been built, otherwise ntpd fails to start. ...an application compiled and dynamically linked with 1.0.0 does not need to be recompiled when the shared library is updated to 1.0.2.[1] Or could the current OpenSSL version be made a command line and/or config parameter of ntpd, to allow updating without rebuilding? If you feel you have need to update OpenSSL, you may simply 'drop-in' the binaries. While this may be seem to be true I have found that the link ID's don't always match so you should always go with the dll of the library you linked with. Please stop using the ntp.org name in your reply-to: Reply-To: g...@lists.ntp.org, , a...@lists.ntp.org, guysal...@lists.ntp.org, d...@lists.ntp.org, t...@lists.ntp.org None of these are valid nor are they for you to use. Danny ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Danny Mayer ma...@ntp.org wrote: None of these are valid nor are they for you to use. Take down the mailing list/Usenet gateway. Or make it smarter. I would vote for the former. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 12/01/2015 14:31, Brian Inglis wrote: On 2015-01-12 00:32, Harlan Stenn wrote: Brian Inglis writes: Current OpenSSL version is 1.0.1k since maintenance improved after Heartbleed encouraged LF/CII and others to fund OpenSSL. Which OpenSSL version is currently required? Any way that support of updated OpenSSL versions by ntpd could be improved? You're talking about the windows version, right? Yes, as that appears to have issues using updated releases: On 2015-01-10 11:13, Martin Burnicki wrote: Please note that beside the NTP binaries you also need the openssl DLL in the version against which the binaries have been built, otherwise ntpd fails to start. as I tried to update with previous stable, found this problem, and had to revert. Do the binaries here work for you? http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/x86/index.html -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote: On 2015-01-10, Rob nom...@example.com wrote: William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote: On 2015-01-09, trackeroft...@gmail.com trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: What do you mean It is branded? And why is that a problem? Hello William, 1. The installer is branded: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/setup.html I still have no idea what you are talking about. Meinberg, a company, makes available for free a version of ntp compiled to run on Windows. What is branded about that? branded means that the name and/or logo of that company/brand appears on the screen during the installation phase and maybe later is left in some files on the system. And this is a problem why? Not for me to determine. The OP posted this as a problem. You asked what it is branded means, and I explained. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 2015-01-10 11:13, Martin Burnicki wrote: Please note that beside the NTP binaries you also need the openssl DLL in the version against which the binaries have been built, otherwise ntpd fails to start. Current OpenSSL version is 1.0.1k since maintenance improved after Heartbleed encouraged LF/CII and others to fund OpenSSL. Which OpenSSL version is currently required? Any way that support of updated OpenSSL versions by ntpd could be improved? -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 2015-01-11, Rob nom...@example.com wrote: William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote: On 2015-01-10, Rob nom...@example.com wrote: William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote: On 2015-01-09, trackeroft...@gmail.com trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: What do you mean It is branded? And why is that a problem? Hello William, 1. The installer is branded: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/setup.html I still have no idea what you are talking about. Meinberg, a company, makes available for free a version of ntp compiled to run on Windows. What is branded about that? branded means that the name and/or logo of that company/brand appears on the screen during the installation phase and maybe later is left in some files on the system. And this is a problem why? Not for me to determine. The OP posted this as a problem. You asked what it is branded means, and I explained. Sorry, I had thought you were the OP when I responded. Note that his definition of branded may be different from yours. And I still have no idea what that is a problem -- unless perhaps he is trying to pass off Meinburg's work as his own:-) Note that if desperate he could probably figure out where the Meinberg logo is stored and replace it. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
And this is a problem why? Not for me to determine. The OP posted this as a problem. You asked what it is branded means, and I explained. Sorry, I had thought you were the OP when I responded. Note that his definition of branded may be different from yours. And I still have no idea what that is a problem -- unless perhaps he is trying to pass off Meinburg's work as his own:-) Note that if desperate he could probably figure out where the Meinberg logo is stored and replace it. I can see the dark nature of human:P Don't get me wrong but usually inklings are bad, especially if they stay public... It was not nice. Thanks for a lot of explanations. They are very helpful. To stop your inklings I've just wanted to integrate ntp client with my own software into common installer. Now I'm not convinced it was good idea, likely not. A lot of ntp's versions could make me more work every time and thus it doesn't help user who installs my software. best regards Johny ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 2015-01-11, trackeroft...@gmail.com trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: And this is a problem why? Not for me to determine. The OP posted this as a problem. You asked what it is branded means, and I explained. Sorry, I had thought you were the OP when I responded. Note that his definition of branded may be different from yours. And I still have no idea what that is a problem -- unless perhaps he is trying to pass off Meinburg's work as his own:-) Note that if desperate he could probably figure out where the Meinberg logo is stored and replace it. I can see the dark nature of human:P Don't get me wrong but usually inklings are bad, especially if they stay public... It was not nice. Thanks for a lot of explanations. They are very helpful. To stop your inklings I've just wanted to integrate ntp client with my own software into common installer. Now I'm not convinced it was good idea, likely not. A lot of ntp's versions could make me more work every time and thus it doesn't help user who installs my software. I agree. BEst not do that. Tell them they need ntpd, and where to get it. But do you really want the responsibility when the next severe bug is discovered and you have to trott out a new version of your system? ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
Brian Inglis wrote: On 2015-01-10 11:13, Martin Burnicki wrote: Please note that beside the NTP binaries you also need the openssl DLL in the version against which the binaries have been built, otherwise ntpd fails to start. Current OpenSSL version is 1.0.1k since maintenance improved after Heartbleed encouraged LF/CII and others to fund OpenSSL. Which OpenSSL version is currently required? Any way that support of updated OpenSSL versions by ntpd could be improved? The 4.2.8 installer is shipped with openSSL 1.0.1j which was current when I built the NTP binaries. When 4.2.8p1 is released we'll also upgrade openSSL to the current version. Martin ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 2015-01-11 14:31, Martin Burnicki wrote: Brian Inglis wrote: On 2015-01-10 11:13, Martin Burnicki wrote: Please note that beside the NTP binaries you also need the openssl DLL in the version against which the binaries have been built, otherwise ntpd fails to start. Current OpenSSL version is 1.0.1k since maintenance improved after Heartbleed encouraged LF/CII and others to fund OpenSSL. Which OpenSSL version is currently required? Any way that support of updated OpenSSL versions by ntpd could be improved? The 4.2.8 installer is shipped with openSSL 1.0.1j which was current when I built the NTP binaries. When 4.2.8p1 is released we'll also upgrade openSSL to the current version. So can we install 1.0.1k with name 1.0.1j to run with 4.2.8, and similarly when 1.0.1l is released, can we name that 1.0.1k to run with 4.2.8p1, or is an internal version number checked which would prevent that? Or could the current OpenSSL version be made a command line and/or config parameter of ntpd, to allow updating without rebuilding? -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote: On 2015-01-09, trackeroft...@gmail.com trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: What do you mean It is branded? And why is that a problem? Hello William, 1. The installer is branded: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/setup.html I still have no idea what you are talking about. Meinberg, a company, makes available for free a version of ntp compiled to run on Windows. What is branded about that? branded means that the name and/or logo of that company/brand appears on the screen during the installation phase and maybe later is left in some files on the system. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
Assuming it's something like 4.2.8p1-beta5: 4.2.8P1BetaN are newer than 4.2.8 but they're not release candidates like 4.2.8.pN-RCm will be. You can see the 4.2 releases here: http://archive.ntp.org/ntp4/ntp-4.2/. Thanks Paul for the explanation. Now it is clear. RCm is pre, betaM is post. So now the version can be defined by 4 digits: x.y.zpN. Where can I find changelog for the p1 and betas? I can't find it here: http://archive.ntp.org/ntp4/ntp-4.2/NEWS best regards Johny ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 09/01/15 15:58, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I'm looking for compiled NTP 4.2.8 for Windows. I know Meinberg's version but unfortunately it is branded. Does anybody know such binary package? I want to avoid compiling it by myself if I can. best regards Johny Johny, What Meinberg have done is to (1) compile ntpd and (2) wrap it into an installer. Because the upstream ntpd does not include a Windows installer. It would also be possible to just take the binaries (for example the ones David makes available), manually put them in the right places on the Windows machine, manually set the thing up as a service, etc. In other words, to manually do the work of an installer. Your choice. HTH, Jan ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
Jan, I'm just replying to your post because it the most recent one in this thread. Jan Ceuleers wrote: On 09/01/15 15:58, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I'm looking for compiled NTP 4.2.8 for Windows. I know Meinberg's version but unfortunately it is branded. Does anybody know such binary package? I want to avoid compiling it by myself if I can. best regards Johny Johny, What Meinberg have done is to (1) compile ntpd and (2) wrap it into an installer. Because the upstream ntpd does not include a Windows installer. Right. There is no branding in the NTP binaries. The only branding is in the installer. For those who don't know: I'm the person at Meinberg who builds the binaries, the whole intention of the installer is just to simplify installation under Windows. I'm just writing this from home. Here is a some clarification: The stock 4.2.8 version didn't compile under Windows. I had to do some changes to the Visual Studio project files (which are part of the NTP source code) to get this done. A define had to be added to the config.h file, and a new source code .c module hat to be added to the libntp project file. That's all. The changes have been submitted to the NTP source tree and are now in the current version of the repo. Soon there will be a patch version 4.2.8p1 which fixes a few more build problems. Actually there are BETA versions of the p1 versions available which can be tested to be sure p1 compiles properly. Please note that beside the NTP binaries you also need the openssl DLL in the version against which the binaries have been built, otherwise ntpd fails to start. It would also be possible to just take the binaries (for example the ones David makes available), manually put them in the right places on the Windows machine, manually set the thing up as a service, etc. In other words, to manually do the work of an installer. Right. There is no branding in the NTP binaries. The only branding is in the installer. For those who don't know: I'm the person at Meinberg who builds the binaries, the whole intention of the installer is just to simplify installation under Windows. Here is a some clarification: The stock 4.2.8 version didn't compile under Windows. I had to do some changes to the Visual Studio project files (which are part of the NTP source code) to get this done. A define had to be added to the config.h file, and a new source code .c module hat to be added to the libntp project file. That's all. The changes have been submitted to the NTP source tree and are now in the current version of the repo. Soon there will be a patch version 4.2.8p1 which fixes a few more build problems. Actually there are BETA versions of the p1 versions available which can be tested to be sure p1 compiles properly. Please note that beside the NTP binaries you also need the openssl DLL in the version against which the binaries have been built, otherwise ntpd fails to start. Your choice. Jepp. Martin ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 10/01/2015 15:08, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: [] Where can I find changelog for the p1 and betas? I can't find it here: http://archive.ntp.org/ntp4/ntp-4.2/NEWS best regards Johny http://archive.ntp.org/ntp4/ChangeLog-stable-rc -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 09/01/2015 23:55, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: What do you mean It is branded? And why is that a problem? Hello William, 1. The installer is branded: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/setup.html 2. The installer makes a lot of things. I need pure final and stable ntp. best regards Johny Johny, Just to be clear, I do not supply the installer, but I do provide screen-shots of using the Meinberg installer for those who find it useful. I have no hesitation in recommending the Meinberg installer for users first install of NTP, as it sets up the service, firewall NTP user etc. You would need to do all those things in your own code - perhaps using InnoSetup - but why reinvent the wheel? There will never be a final NTP, just increasingly recent stable and development versions. I suggest installing the Meinberg 4.2.8 now: http://www.meinbergglobal.com/download/ntp/windows/ntp-4.2.8-win32-setup.exe 4.2.8p1 should be one you can compile yourself - it's quite easy, actually under Windows, and it's simpler and much faster than under Linux or FreeBSD. -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 1/10/2015 10:08 AM, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: Assuming it's something like 4.2.8p1-beta5: 4.2.8P1BetaN are newer than 4.2.8 but they're not release candidates like 4.2.8.pN-RCm will be. You can see the 4.2 releases here: http://archive.ntp.org/ntp4/ntp-4.2/. Thanks Paul for the explanation. Now it is clear. RCm is pre, betaM is post. So now the version can be defined by 4 digits: x.y.zpN. Where can I find changelog for the p1 and betas? I can't find it here: http://archive.ntp.org/ntp4/ntp-4.2/NEWS best regards Johny There was a last minute change to the code before the release of NTP 4.2.8 and as a result it didn't build on Windows. The beta's are mainly to fix the problem with the Windows build. 4.2.8p1 should be released in a week or so as soon as we can be sure that it is working properly. To correct your above statement, beta's are prior to Release Candidates (RC). Danny ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 2015-01-10, Rob nom...@example.com wrote: William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote: On 2015-01-09, trackeroft...@gmail.com trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: What do you mean It is branded? And why is that a problem? Hello William, 1. The installer is branded: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/setup.html I still have no idea what you are talking about. Meinberg, a company, makes available for free a version of ntp compiled to run on Windows. What is branded about that? branded means that the name and/or logo of that company/brand appears on the screen during the installation phase and maybe later is left in some files on the system. And this is a problem why? (Note that ntpd runs in the background, so there is nowhere for the logo to show). The name of the University of Delaware, a company, also remains in files on the system. And you could always do a search of the installed files for the name Meinberg, It thus sounds of my three options, the best for you would be not to run ntpd. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 5:57 PM, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, it is still not clear for me. If p1 is the latest release so why the files are marked as beta4, beta5? It looks like rc version, not final. Assuming it's something like 4.2.8p1-beta5: 4.2.8P1BetaN are newer than 4.2.8 but they're not release candidates like 4.2.8.pN-RCm will be. You can see the 4.2 releases here: http://archive.ntp.org/ntp4/ntp-4.2/. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 2015-01-09, trackeroft...@gmail.com trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: W dniu pi??tek, 9 stycznia 2015 20:46:37 UTC+1 u??ytkownik David Taylor napisa??: On 09/01/2015 16:07, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks David, It is almost I'm asking but I guess (according to file names) there is not the latest final version (stable) but rather beta/devel or I am wrong. best regards Johny Johny, What I have their is the latest available. It is in the stable branch (4.2.8) not the development branch, but it is a beta of 4.2.8p1. Once released (I hope soon but I don't know), 4.2.8p1 will be the official stable version. Version 4.2.8 (p0) did not compile on quite a few systems. Still confused? Perhaps Harlan will clarify Yes, it is still not clear for me. If p1 is the latest release so why the files are marked as beta4, beta5? It looks like rc version, not final. If you want to install ntp, then 4.2.8 is the only option-- other versions have severe security holes (although they can be ammeliorated). So, you have three choices. a) run 4.2.8 and forget about worrying about whether it is beta or zeta software b) don't run ntpd c) Run and earlier version but make sure that it is set up so tht the security bugs are not exploitable. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
What do you mean It is branded? And why is that a problem? Hello William, 1. The installer is branded: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/setup.html 2. The installer makes a lot of things. I need pure final and stable ntp. best regards Johny ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 2015-01-09, trackeroft...@gmail.com trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I'm looking for compiled NTP 4.2.8 for Windows. I know Meinberg's version but unfortunately it is branded. What do you mean It is branded? And why is that a problem? Does anybody know such binary package? I want to avoid compiling it by myself if I can. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
W dniu piątek, 9 stycznia 2015 16:27:55 UTC+1 użytkownik David Taylor napisał: On 09/01/2015 14:58, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I'm looking for compiled NTP 4.2.8 for Windows. I know Meinberg's version but unfortunately it is branded. Does anybody know such binary package? I want to avoid compiling it by myself if I can. best regards Johny Binaries alone are here: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/x86/index.html -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu Thanks David, It is almost I'm asking but I guess (according to file names) there is not the latest final version (stable) but rather beta/devel or I am wrong. best regards Johny ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
[ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
Hello, I'm looking for compiled NTP 4.2.8 for Windows. I know Meinberg's version but unfortunately it is branded. Does anybody know such binary package? I want to avoid compiling it by myself if I can. best regards Johny ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 09/01/2015 14:58, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I'm looking for compiled NTP 4.2.8 for Windows. I know Meinberg's version but unfortunately it is branded. Does anybody know such binary package? I want to avoid compiling it by myself if I can. best regards Johny Binaries alone are here: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/x86/index.html -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 09/01/2015 16:07, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks David, It is almost I'm asking but I guess (according to file names) there is not the latest final version (stable) but rather beta/devel or I am wrong. best regards Johny Johny, What I have their is the latest available. It is in the stable branch (4.2.8) not the development branch, but it is a beta of 4.2.8p1. Once released (I hope soon but I don't know), 4.2.8p1 will be the official stable version. Version 4.2.8 (p0) did not compile on quite a few systems. Still confused? Perhaps Harlan will clarify -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
On 09/01/2015 19:46, David Taylor wrote: [] What I have their is the latest available. It is in the stable branch Arrgh! s/their/there/ -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
Re: [ntp:questions] NTP 4.2.8 for Windows, not branded
W dniu piątek, 9 stycznia 2015 20:46:37 UTC+1 użytkownik David Taylor napisał: On 09/01/2015 16:07, trackeroft...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks David, It is almost I'm asking but I guess (according to file names) there is not the latest final version (stable) but rather beta/devel or I am wrong. best regards Johny Johny, What I have their is the latest available. It is in the stable branch (4.2.8) not the development branch, but it is a beta of 4.2.8p1. Once released (I hope soon but I don't know), 4.2.8p1 will be the official stable version. Version 4.2.8 (p0) did not compile on quite a few systems. Still confused? Perhaps Harlan will clarify Yes, it is still not clear for me. If p1 is the latest release so why the files are marked as beta4, beta5? It looks like rc version, not final. kind regards Johny ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
