From owner-freebsd-current Sat Jan 1 16:31:36 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25ED014D74 for ; Sat, 1 Jan 2000 16:31:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost.freebsd.dk [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA29323; Sun, 2 Jan 2000 01:31:26 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Karl Denninger Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: xntpd - VERY old folks, how about updating? :-) In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 01 Jan 2000 18:26:50 CST." <20000101182650.B17456@Denninger.Net> Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2000 01:31:25 +0100 Message-ID: <29321.946773085@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20000101182650.B17456@Denninger.Net>, Karl Denninger writes: >Yes, and my driftfile had that parameter in there. Uhm, Poul, remember I've >been at this for just a LITTLE while. Xntpd is something I had deployed >back in my *Sun* days (back when FreeBSD was, well, non-existent) Karl, remember who was there too ? :-) >> Anyway, ntpd4 is in CURRENT... > >Now it is. > >And it works correctly too. In general yes, but not if you use the hardpps() with a refclock, it works better after I fixed a couple of almost-mutually-canceling sign-bugs, but the parameters of the hardpps() PLL relative to the FLL are wrong. >Thanks anyway, even with the attitude. Many happy returns :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message