Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 4 Sep 2003 19:35:35 -0700
From:      Matthew Hunt <mph@astro.caltech.edu>
To:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Cc:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Bidwatcher port
Message-ID:  <20030905023534.GA561@wopr.caltech.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20030904134013.GA54877@rot13.obsecurity.org>
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.10.10309040209320.10078-100000@andrsn.stanford.edu> <20030904134013.GA54877@rot13.obsecurity.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 06:40:13AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:

> Also, you should contact the port maintainer to propose changes to the
> port...that's what they're there for.

Annelise did CC me (the maintainer) on her email about the port, I
just haven't chimed in yet because I've been rearranging the office
(including computer moves) all day.

I don't have strong feelings either way about TIMEFUDGE.  I agree
with Annelise that it's kind of a dumb idea in the modern era of NTP
timekeeping; at the very least, 5 minutes of slop is really a lot.
OTOH, I'm not sure that it's the job of FreeBSD porters to make
changes like these in an application's default behavior (going behind
the author's back, as it were).  Opinions?

Matt

-- 
Matthew Hunt <mph@astro.caltech.edu> * Eight lanes of shimmering cement from
http://www.pobox.com/~mph/           * here to Pasadena!



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030905023534.GA561>