I have read ESR's writeup on our buglist, and agree with his assessments. ..m
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:27 AM Hal Murray via devel <devel@ntpsec.org> wrote: > > * I need to work on #348: reverse function for restrict > > * unpeer should be made to fully work from ntpq :config. This one is > mine too. > > There is a quirk tangled in this area. I don't know if there is a bug for > it. > > When the pool mode adds a server, if needed, it pokes a hole in the > restrictions. > > We need to remove that hole when that server is removed. > > I think we need to add a new flag to indicate that the restrict slot was > automatically added. > > Maybe we should add another flag to disable poking holes. Maybe it's an > enhancement rather than bug fix, but this would be the time to do it. > > ------- > > I didn't see fixing ntpq retransmissions on your list. (I'm still catching > up so I might have missed it.) > > I think the way to fix this is to clean up the logging. > > I've never been particularly happy with the standard log level approach. > Maybe it would make more sense if there was a description of what the > levels > were intended to cover. > > Some of the cruft may be my fault. I hacked a lot of the logging to do > what > I needed when chasing some bug(s?). I may have broken any plan that you > had. > > Maybe we need log-to-file. > > In the context of fixing this bug, I think I would like a logging mode that > showed the command line and the packets. Reply packets can be verbose so > maybe we need a switch/level for that. Maybe we need another switch/level > to > show steps within long running commands. Mumble. > > > -- > These are my opinions. I hate spam. > > > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@ntpsec.org > http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > -- Mark Atwood http://about.me/markatwood +1-206-604-2198 Mobile & Signal
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel