Paul wrote:
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:17 AM, David Taylor
david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
But the more variants you introduce, the more opportunity for confusion
there is, and the more support effort is needed.
Yep.
Not in this case.
If you had a pure client installation
David Taylor schrieb:
On 29/04/2014 15:35, Rob wrote:
[]
But with a modular approach you would not need to rebuild to add
a standard refclock, that would just be the installation of another
package containing the precompiled refclock or refclock bundle.
That is no different from having a
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Martin Burnicki
martin.burni...@meinberg.de wrote:
If you had a pure client installation you couldn't even send an
ntpdate request to that machine just to check the time offsets.
Let's try and return to the original issue. timepps.h is not included in
core
Martin Burnicki martin.burni...@meinberg.de wrote:
David Taylor schrieb:
On 29/04/2014 15:35, Rob wrote:
[]
But with a modular approach you would not need to rebuild to add
a standard refclock, that would just be the installation of another
package containing the precompiled refclock or
Paul writes:
I seemed to recall a distro that shipped an ntpd with (effectively)
disable-all-clocks and an ntpd with enable-all-clocks.
Debian once offered an ntp-simple package which did not include any
refclocks as well as an ntp package which did.
--
John Hasler
jhas...@newsguy.com
Dancing
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:14 PM, John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com wrote:
Debian once offered an ntp-simple package
It's nice to know it wasn't an imaginary friend.
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
David Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
On 26/04/2014 05:05, Harlan Stenn wrote:
William Unruh writes:
[]
More recent ntpd combine server and client in one program.
Not sure when that was.
It's been the case for at least 20 years' time.
This is something that may be
Harlan Stenn wrote:
This is something that may be different in the upcoming rewrite.
Do you have a pointer to those plans?
Martin
--
Martin Burnicki
Meinberg Funkuhren
Bad Pyrmont
Germany
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
Paul wrote:
We have thousands
of clients served from three S2 servers (so 0% need for refclock support).
There are three S1 servers on campus (not yet in production). All three
required building NTPd, one required a driver patch and one required
building a kernel.
It would be interesting to
Harlan Stenn wrote:
William Unruh writes:
Well, ntpd could include timepps.h into ntpd source and point to it,
instead of using the system one.
Is there only one version of that file that is compatible with the
places NTP will be built? What sort of bit-rot issues are there if we
include a
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 12:12 AM, David Taylor
david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
I would find it annoying to have to tell someone Oh, but if you want to
pass on the time you need to uninstall what you have now and replace it
with the client/server version.
Clearly there was
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 4:35 AM, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
This solution provides a lean ntpd program that is fit for most users,
and it facilitates the easy addition of refclock drivers.
Sure or you just recognize that only one system in a million needs refclock
support and assume anyone
On 29/04/2014 14:40, Paul wrote:
[]
Sure or you just recognize that only one system in a million needs refclock
support and assume anyone running a refclock needs to be smart enough to
build ntpd with the requisite driver.
However, many of my users who use PPS or other ref-clocks run Windows,
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:12 AM, David Taylor
david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
However, many of my users who use PPS or other ref-clocks run Windows
The subject line is Attn LINUX distributors. And it's really about
timepps.h
___
David Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
On 29/04/2014 14:40, Paul wrote:
[]
Sure or you just recognize that only one system in a million needs refclock
support and assume anyone running a refclock needs to be smart enough to
build ntpd with the requisite driver.
However,
On 29/04/2014 15:35, Rob wrote:
[]
But with a modular approach you would not need to rebuild to add
a standard refclock, that would just be the installation of another
package containing the precompiled refclock or refclock bundle.
That is no different from having a program like Perl as a base,
On 29/04/2014 15:33, Paul wrote:
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:12 AM, David Taylor
david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
However, many of my users who use PPS or other ref-clocks run Windows
The subject line is Attn LINUX distributors. And it's really about
timepps.h
.. and I would
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 11:21 AM, David Taylor
david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid wrote:
But the threat of breaking NTP into two separate parts had been mentioned,
and it was that which I was addressing
Sure. But I really have no idea what Harlan was speaking to there and, for
Windows
Martin Burnicki writes:
Harlan Stenn wrote:
This is something that may be different in the upcoming rewrite.
Do you have a pointer to those plans?
Not yet - we can start a discussion topic on the wiki and I doubt I'll
have time to do much with it for at least a month. Right now I have a
On 26/04/2014 05:05, Harlan Stenn wrote:
William Unruh writes:
[]
More recent ntpd combine server and client in one program.
Not sure when that was.
It's been the case for at least 20 years' time.
This is something that may be different in the upcoming rewrite.
H
I hope not, as it would
mike cook michael.c...@sfr.fr wrote:
If you look at those, they are included because the API does not ( or
didn't ) exist in the OSs whereas it does for Linux so responsibility should
reside there.
IIRC, the OP was a heads up which IS useful, but complaints should go to
the
Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
Can't they add just one simple package to that?
Well pps-tools is clearly special. E.g. it's no longer advertised for 12.04
Well, it is for Ubuntu 14.04 LTS
Le 27 avr. 2014 à 12:28, Rob a écrit :
mike cook michael.c...@sfr.fr wrote:
If you look at those, they are included because the API does not ( or
didn't ) exist in the OSs whereas it does for Linux so responsibility should
reside there.
IIRC, the OP was a heads up which IS useful, but
On 27/04/14 11:28, Rob wrote:
is there a mailinglist or newsgroup where all those distributors
are reading so I don't need to create accounts on a zillion different
bugzillas and file a bug there?
You are still going to have to submit the individual bug reports as it
will be such a minor
mike cook michael.c...@sfr.fr wrote:
Le 27 avr. 2014 à 12:28, Rob a écrit :
mike cook michael.c...@sfr.fr wrote:
If you look at those, they are included because the API does not ( or
didn't ) exist in the OSs whereas it does for Linux so responsibility
should reside there.
IIRC, the OP
On -10.01.-28163 20:59, Rob wrote:
Apparently there is unresolved discussion whether a .h describing a
PPS API belongs in the set of kernel include files or in a separate
package.
There is? Can't say I've ever dealt with PPS, but *if* this .h provides
the necessary information that *several*
Jochen Bern jochen.b...@linworks.de wrote:
On -10.01.-28163 20:59, Rob wrote:
Apparently there is unresolved discussion whether a .h describing a
PPS API belongs in the set of kernel include files or in a separate
package.
There is? Can't say I've ever dealt with PPS, but *if* this .h
On -10.01.-28163 20:59, Rob wrote:
What I mean is that for building packages they need not only building
tools but also -dev packages for many libraries that are going to be
used by the packages being built. There is a long list of packages that
one is supposed to install before even
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 12:57 AM, mike cook michael.c...@sfr.fr wrote:
If you look at those, they are included because the API does not ( or
didn't ) exist in the OSs whereas it does for Linux
I'll admit to being largely uninformed but to me it looks like all the
complete (per the RFC)
On 2014-04-27, mike cook michael.c...@sfr.fr wrote:
Le 27 avr. 2014 ? 05:36, Paul a ?crit :
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
I think it's fair to wonder why the NTP tar ball doesn't include
timepps-Linux.h along with others they do include.
On Sat, Apr
On 2014-04-27, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
Notice:
Several years ago I wanted to sync my clock to a GPS providing PPS.
At that time, PPS support in the kernel was only available as a set
of patches. You had to apply them to a kernel source tree and rebuild
the kernel. And I think
William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
But those modules give timing to one a few (5-10) usec. because of
interrupt handling issues. Your shm solution would seem to me to be more
than adequate for any timing requirements if they can be solved with an
interrupt driven pps.
Well, the kernel PPS
Jochen Bern jochen.b...@linworks.de wrote:
On -10.01.-28163 20:59, Rob wrote:
What I mean is that for building packages they need not only building
tools but also -dev packages for many libraries that are going to be
used by the packages being built. There is a long list of packages that
one
On 2014-04-27, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
But those modules give timing to one a few (5-10) usec. because of
interrupt handling issues. Your shm solution would seem to me to be more
than adequate for any timing requirements if they can be solved with an
William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
On 2014-04-27, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
But those modules give timing to one a few (5-10) usec. because of
interrupt handling issues. Your shm solution would seem to me to be more
than adequate for any timing
Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org wrote:
William Unruh writes:
On 2014-04-25, Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:36 PM, William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
Why shoul dit ship with no refclocks? ... DO you have the same opinion for
serial
port or parallel ports, or
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:18 PM, William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
As do you-- generalising from your one situation.
Are you actually suggesting that the number of refclocks is a
non-negligible fraction of the number of clients? Even if you only include
Linux that makes no sense.
Most
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 3:33 AM, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
The point is that the program is compiled
with a fixed set of refclocks that is unneccessarily limited because
the environment it was compiled in was not complete.
Are you saying that the ntpd that ships with Ubuntu 14.04 is
Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 3:33 AM, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
The point is that the program is compiled
with a fixed set of refclocks that is unneccessarily limited because
the environment it was compiled in was not complete.
Are you saying that the ntpd
I am saying that the ntpd that ships with Ubuntu 14.04 is limited because
it was built on a system where timepps.h was not present, and thus the
ATOM and JUPITER (and a couple other) refclocks were not included in the
binary. Even though PPS support is present in the kernel.
I built ntpd
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Jason Rabel
ja...@extremeoverclocking.comwrote:
Don't you think that is a gripe for the people over at Ubuntu?
Well maybe. The OP was directed to Linux distributors but in this case
that's Debian not Ubuntu. But to your point -- even if you don't much care
Jason Rabel ja...@extremeoverclocking.com wrote:
I am saying that the ntpd that ships with Ubuntu 14.04 is limited because
it was built on a system where timepps.h was not present, and thus the
ATOM and JUPITER (and a couple other) refclocks were not included in the
binary. Even though PPS
On 2014-04-26, Jason Rabel ja...@extremeoverclocking.com wrote:
I am saying that the ntpd that ships with Ubuntu 14.04 is limited because
it was built on a system where timepps.h was not present, and thus the
ATOM and JUPITER (and a couple other) refclocks were not included in the
binary.
William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
On 2014-04-26, Jason Rabel ja...@extremeoverclocking.com wrote:
I am saying that the ntpd that ships with Ubuntu 14.04 is limited because
it was built on a system where timepps.h was not present, and thus the
ATOM and JUPITER (and a couple other) refclocks
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
Can't they add just one simple package to that?
Well pps-tools is clearly special. E.g. it's no longer advertised for 12.04
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
William Unruh writes:
Well, ntpd could include timepps.h into ntpd source and point to it,
instead of using the system one.
Is there only one version of that file that is compatible with the
places NTP will be built? What sort of bit-rot issues are there if we
include a copy of the file in the
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
I think it's fair to wonder why the NTP tar ball doesn't include
timepps-Linux.h along with others they do include.
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org wrote:
Is there only one version of that file
Le 27 avr. 2014 à 05:36, Paul a écrit :
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
I think it's fair to wonder why the NTP tar ball doesn't include
timepps-Linux.h along with others they do include.
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Harlan Stenn st...@ntp.org
On 04/24/2014 09:31 PM, Rob wrote:
all that is required to get PPS working is to fetch the source
package of ntpd for the distribution and recompile it while that
single file has been added. e.g. on Ubuntu that file is present
in the package pps-tools.
So please, on your build systems,
Jan Ceuleers jan.ceule...@computer.org wrote:
On 04/24/2014 09:31 PM, Rob wrote:
all that is required to get PPS working is to fetch the source
package of ntpd for the distribution and recompile it while that
single file has been added. e.g. on Ubuntu that file is present
in the package
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
Of course it is all caused by the failure to include timepps.h in the
kernel include file package, where they belong IMHO. Apparently there
is unresolved debate about that. Ubuntu puts this development related
file in the
Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
Of course it is all caused by the failure to include timepps.h in the
kernel include file package, where they belong IMHO. Apparently there
is unresolved debate about that. Ubuntu puts this
On 2014-04-25, Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Rob nom...@example.com wrote:
Of course it is all caused by the failure to include timepps.h in the
kernel include file package, where they belong IMHO. Apparently there
is unresolved debate about that. Ubuntu
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:36 PM, William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
Why shoul dit ship with no refclocks? ... DO you have the same opinion for
serial
port or parallel ports, or network drivers?
(Ignoring your mischaracterization of what I said and the strawman
arguments) because a
On 2014-04-25, Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:36 PM, William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
Why shoul dit ship with no refclocks? ... DO you have the same opinion for
serial
port or parallel ports, or network drivers?
(Ignoring your mischaracterization of what I
William Unruh writes:
On 2014-04-25, Paul tik-...@bodosom.net wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:36 PM, William Unruh un...@invalid.ca wrote:
Why shoul dit ship with no refclocks? ... DO you have the same opinion for
serial
port or parallel ports, or network drivers?
(Ignoring your
On two different distributions, openSUSE 13.1 and Ubuntu 14.04, I
noticed that while everything is available to support kernel PPS,
the distributed ntpd is compiled without refclock 22 (Atom) support.
This apparently is not intentional, as the ./configure command on
both distributions includes
57 matches
Mail list logo
