> I'm talking about this snippet that was removed:
-#ifdef RLIMIT_MEMLOCK
- case RLIMIT_MEMLOCK:
- /* ignore - for backward compatibility only */
I fixed the place that used to call it.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:39:15PM -0700, Hal Murray wrote:
> > Only thing left to revert is missing guards near "switch (rl_what) {"
> > near line 3630 in ntpd/ntp_config.h
>
> The whole point of this change was to get rid of ifdefs that weren't needed
> because the symbols they were checking
> Only thing left to revert is missing guards near "switch (rl_what) {"
> near line 3630 in ntpd/ntp_config.h
The whole point of this change was to get rid of ifdefs that weren't needed
because the symbols they were checking are in POSIX. Are we running on any
systems that don't have
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:42:18PM -0700, Hal Murray wrote:
> > Can you partially revert ...
>
> I thought I had fixed it. Have you done a recent pull? Is the current code
> still broken?
Only thing left to revert is missing guards near "switch (rl_what) {" near line
3630 in
> Can you partially revert ...
I thought I had fixed it. Have you done a recent pull? Is the current code
still broken?
Again, thanks for catching this.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel mailing list
devel@ntpsec.org
On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 06:18:47PM -0700, Hal Murray via devel wrote:
>
> There are various #ifdefs testing RLIMIT_MEMLOCK and friends
>
> The Linux man page for setrlimit says:
>getrlimit(), setrlimit(): POSIX.1-2001, POSIX.1-2008, SVr4, 4.3BSD.
> So I think we can assume it exists and
It only contains netof6() which is only used by the test routines.
Any reason not to nuke it and the tests?
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel mailing list
devel@ntpsec.org
http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
in ntp_debug.h, there is a TPRINT macro.
* TPRINT is used where the logger needs to remain even when DEBUG is off.
TPRINT is not used in ntpd/, DPRINT is not used in libntp/
I assume the idea is that a library would always be built with debugging built
in. If you used the library, you
rlaa...@wiktel.com said:
> >From the draft, it sounds like this might be as simple as NOT specifying a
> port on the socket, which is what other implementations do.
Unfortunately, the code isn't written that way. There is no socket for each
server. There is one for each interface. It uses
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 1:23 PM Richard Laager wrote:
> On 9/16/19 6:08 PM, James Browning via devel wrote:
> > - additions to the DNS code to allow non-A/ pools. (cname/srv
> probably)
>
> Is it not following CNAMEs already? I haven't checked.
>
No, it seems not to. Also since typing that
On 9/16/19 1:33 AM, Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> Port randomization:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-ntp-port-randomization-04
> I'd guess somewhere between a day and a week to implement this.
>From the draft, it sounds like this might be as simple as NOT specifying
a port on the
On 9/16/19 6:08 PM, James Browning via devel wrote:
> - additions to the DNS code to allow non-A/ pools. (cname/srv probably)
Is it not following CNAMEs already? I haven't checked.
> - less awful asccidoctor support
What's the issue here? I might be able to help.
--
Richard
> This is exactly what futexes are for.
Is there a standard recipe for using them in shared memory when the processes
using them can start/stop/crash at any time?
I see 2 problem areas. One is initializing the futex. The other is
recovering from a crash while the futex was busy. (lock
13 matches
Mail list logo
