Harlan Stenn <st...@ntp.org> wrote:
> Rob writes:
>> Harlan Stenn <st...@ntp.org> wrote:
>> > Rob writes:
>> >> Harlan Stenn <st...@ntp.org> wrote:
>> >> > If you disgree and think NTP should provide the file all the time, then:
>> >> >
>> >> > - how do you propose we find out if the underlying API is really
>> >> > provided in the currently-running kernel?
>> >>
>> >> The source of the includefile does absolutely nothing in the ways of
>> >> solving that problem!
>> >
>> > If the file isn't there we don't go looking for the API that isn't
>> > there, either.
>> >
>> > Or am I missing something?
>>
>> The file is only used at build time. It tells absolutely nothing
>> about the kernel configuration, certainly not in the system the binary
>> is running on.
>
> You and I have completely different understandings about how APIs work
> and what this header file is used for.
>
> So you want *us* to add kernel-specific files to live along side
> include/timepps-{SCO,Solaris,SunOS}.h, except you want *us* to deal with
> tracking any changes caused by kernel updates? It's interesting enough
> that we have to do this for Windows.
I am not commenting on the "whoe provides what" but on your claim that
using an available timepps.h would do anything to detect if the PPS API
is available on the system.
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
