On a colocation server I have ntpdc 4.2.6p5@1.2349-o (debian wheezy).
When issueing the command ntpdc -c monlist, the addresses in the
remote address column are looked up in DNS, and when they (or the
lookup result) are too long they are truncated to the width of the
column.
However, in the
On 28/08/2013 13:19, Steve Kostecke wrote:
On 2013-08-28, David Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
detha de...@foad.co.za wrote:
http://detha.co.za/ntp/ntpmon.20130828.jpg
I would be more worried about the 11 ms step in the PPS at about -155
hours...
The PPS signal is plotted in
On 28/08/2013 13:34, Rob wrote:
[]
No, I mean when compiling ntpd for Windows. I think that requires Cygwin.
Not so, it compiles purely with the free MS Visual Studio Express (C++
branch). It does need the OpenSSL source installed as well, but that
also works with MS VS. No Cygwin needed
David Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
On 28/08/2013 13:34, Rob wrote:
[]
No, I mean when compiling ntpd for Windows. I think that requires Cygwin.
Not so, it compiles purely with the free MS Visual Studio Express (C++
branch). It does need the OpenSSL source installed
On 29/08/2013 08:21, Rob wrote:
[]
Sorry... mistake. I mean when compiling *gpsd* for Windows.
Looking at the source, gpsd does not have special code for Windows SHM.
It could work, when it is compiled with Cygwin.
Ah, OK, but I think gpsd for Windows would get a much better reception
were
David Taylor writes:
Ah, OK, but I think gpsd for Windows would get a much better reception
were it not to require Cygwin to run i.e, just like ntp, use only the
standard Windows calls.
From http://www.catb.org/gpsd/ :
No, we don't support Windows — get a better operating system.
esr is not
On 2013-08-29, John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com wrote:
David Taylor writes:
Ah, OK, but I think gpsd for Windows would get a much better reception
were it not to require Cygwin to run i.e, just like ntp, use only the
standard Windows calls.
From http://www.catb.org/gpsd/ :
No, we don't
Hi,
We had another incident where a node configured with multiple NTP
sources had an NTPD which when asked with ntpdc have peers, looks like
things are all OK, but with offsets less than a second, while the node
in fact was 6 days off the mark. Only on a number of ntpdc querries did
some of the
Magnus Danielson wrote:
We had another incident where a node configured with multiple NTP
sources had an NTPD which when asked with ntpdc have peers, looks like
things are all OK, but with offsets less than a second, while the node
in fact was 6 days off the mark. Only on a number of ntpdc
