Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 02:12:43 -0500 From: "Allen Smith" <easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu> To: Studded <Studded@gorean.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, phk@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is 'xntpd' broken in -stable? Message-ID: <9902110212.ZM18803@beatrice.rutgers.edu> In-Reply-To: Studded <Studded@gorean.org> "Re: Is 'xntpd' broken in -stable?" (Jan 12, 10:53am) References: <199810091927.MAA14061@implode.root.com> <9810241606.ZM2203@beatrice.rutgers.edu> <3632EBD7.717C0B6F@gorean.org> <9901120301.ZM2476@beatrice.rutgers.edu> <369A1EC2.61BEA6E1@gorean.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 12, 10:53am, Studded (possibly) wrote: > Allen Smith wrote: > > > > Well... currently, Dave Mills has stated that they aren't maintaining > > xntpd any longer; any updates are through patches they've accepted, > > but have not necessarily done testing on. > > Let's put it this way. Their version of xntpd is much better supported > than ours is. :) Well, yes. > > ntpd-4.0.91 appears sufficiently stable that they're going to make > > it into ntpd-4.1 and an official 'release' pretty soon. I may have spoken a bit too soon... > Well it's too late to do anything with 2.2-Stable. Therefore > contrib'ifying the release of ntpd for 3.something would be the way to > go at this point. After: A. there is indeed a stable ntpd-4.1; B. I can safely upgrade our 2.2-stable system to 3-stable; and C. I'm through with some other stuff; I'll look at doing so... but might Poul Henning-Kamp be a more logical individual for this? -Allen -- Allen Smith easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9902110212.ZM18803>