Bug#785665: [pkg-ntp-maintainers] Bug#785665: ntp: support for atom driver not included
On 01/10/2018 11:03 PM, Daniel M. Weeks wrote: > On Wed, 8 Nov 2017 05:00:50 -0600 Richard Laager wrote: >> I recommend *against* enabling ATOM support. I retract the above statement. Sorry for the noise. I must have been thinking of a different driver. Driver 22 (REFID "PPS") in ntpd/refclock_atom.c is useful in certain scenarios. I used it myself with a Symmetricom clock using the WWVB driver, and continue to use those drivers with NTPsec. So now that I'm thinking of the right driver, I now agree that it is desirable to have built. Driver 22 was working out-of-the-box for me, but that was on an Ubuntu (Xenial) system and not Debian. Ubuntu had enabled PPS support with a Build-Depends on pps-tools (plus some documentation updates). I see that the ntp package in Debian currently has a Build-Depends on pps-tools (on linux-any). Ubuntu didn't need --enable-ATOM for it to get built. >> It is much better to use SHM to talk to gpsd. Here are a whole bunch of >> details: >> http://www.catb.org/gpsd/gpsd-time-service-howto.html >> > There is nothing in that document that discourages ATOM. The link was to show the alternative approach (SHM talking to gpsd). I still recommend this approach instead of driver 22 for Raspberry Pi GPS Stratum 1 systems. -- Richard
Bug#785665: ntp: support for atom driver not included
On Wed, 8 Nov 2017 05:00:50 -0600 Richard Laager wrote: > I recommend *against* enabling ATOM support. > > It is much better to use SHM to talk to gpsd. Here are a whole bunch of > details: > http://www.catb.org/gpsd/gpsd-time-service-howto.html > Richard, There is nothing in that document that discourages ATOM. In fact, it explains KPPS can be stable to +/- 1 uS. Most replies here so far are talking about using the Raspberry Pi GPIO for KPPS. Enabling ATOM at build time does not force it on users. As Robin pointed out, this is only a matter of adding --with-ATOM and then users are free to use it if they desire. -- Daniel M. Weeks
Bug#785665: ntp: support for atom driver not included
I recommend *against* enabling ATOM support. It is much better to use SHM to talk to gpsd. Here are a whole bunch of details: http://www.catb.org/gpsd/gpsd-time-service-howto.html -- Richard
Bug#785665: [pkg-ntp-maintainers] Bug#785665: ntp: support for atom driver not included
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 13:21:18 +0900 Hideki Yamane wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 14:51:44 +0100 Kurt Roeckx wrote: > Maybe the point is that PPS is currently not supported, and that's > really all that needs to be fixed? It's better to support if it doesn't have any side effect, IMHO. And I don't have any idea for it, it's good to ask upstream developers. -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/org http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane Hello, I have just been playing with the latest Raspian lite to setup a few GPS time servers. We use quite a few for remote time servers due to cost and size. Present kernel supports pps by module and can be tested with ppstools to confirm pps operation. On the third system being created, I thought I would do some testing of the ntp configurations to see if I really need to compile the ntp software myself for pps support. After testing all the recommended ntp directives from ntp.org, I have come to the conclusion that atom support is required to get pps to work. Remove the Raspian version of NTP and then compile the source. To test this, I compiled the ntp source my self. ./configure --enable-linuxcaps --with-NMEA --with-ATOM make sudo make install After compiling the source and then modifying /etc/init.d/ntp to point to the correct software, start ntp with the correct ntp.conf file settings, pps works as it is supposed to. PPS is enabled by changing /boot/config.txt to tell the Pi which GPIO pin and adding in the pps kernel module. With pps support now a kernel module, it would be advisable to add ATOM support within ntp so users don't have to recompile ntp to continue support when upgrades occur. Robin Laing
Bug#785665: [pkg-ntp-maintainers] Bug#785665: ntp: support for atom driver not included
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 14:51:44 +0100 Kurt Roeckx wrote: > Maybe the point is that PPS is currently not supported, and that's > really all that needs to be fixed? It's better to support if it doesn't have any side effect, IMHO. And I don't have any idea for it, it's good to ask upstream developers. -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/org http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane
Bug#785665: [pkg-ntp-maintainers] Bug#785665: ntp: support for atom driver not included
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 10:19:45PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: > On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 13:34:42 +0100 > Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > Are you sure that this is actually needed and that it just isn't > > disabled by default in some derived distribution? > > It seems that ATOM driver is necessary for PPS. > see http://www.ntp.org/ntpfaq/NTP-s-config-adv.htm#AEN3845 > > There's no difference with raspian's ntp package with Debian, > at least. Maybe the point is that PPS is currently not supported, and that's really all that needs to be fixed? Kurt
Bug#785665: [pkg-ntp-maintainers] Bug#785665: ntp: support for atom driver not included
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 13:34:42 +0100 Kurt Roeckx wrote: > Are you sure that this is actually needed and that it just isn't > disabled by default in some derived distribution? It seems that ATOM driver is necessary for PPS. see http://www.ntp.org/ntpfaq/NTP-s-config-adv.htm#AEN3845 There's no difference with raspian's ntp package with Debian, at least. -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/org http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane
Bug#785665: [pkg-ntp-maintainers] Bug#785665: ntp: support for atom driver not included
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 09:18:23PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: > Control: tags -1 +patch > > Hi, > > Is there any reason to not enable atom driver support by default? > Several raspi users do rebuild ntp to enable it to build Stratum-1 server, > so release it with this feature is handy for them. Are you sure that this is actually needed and that it just isn't disabled by default in some derived distribution? Kurt
Bug#785665: ntp: support for atom driver not included
Control: tags -1 +patch Hi, Is there any reason to not enable atom driver support by default? Several raspi users do rebuild ntp to enable it to build Stratum-1 server, so release it with this feature is handy for them. -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/org http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane diff -urN ntp-4.2.8p4+dfsg.orig/debian/rules ntp-4.2.8p4+dfsg/debian/rules --- ntp-4.2.8p4+dfsg.orig/debian/rules 2015-07-25 23:36:54.0 +0900 +++ ntp-4.2.8p4+dfsg/debian/rules 2016-01-16 21:13:53.496817614 +0900 @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ --disable-local-libopts \ --enable-ntp-signd \ --disable-dependency-tracking \ + --enable-ATOM \ --with-openssl-libdir=/usr/lib/$(DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH) build: build-arch build-indep
Bug#785665: ntp: support for atom driver not included
Package: ntp Version: 1:4.2.6.p5+dfsg-7 Severity: normal When trying to use the atom driver, the following error appears: May 18 23:32:52 neo ntpd[12749]: refclock_newpeer: clock type 22 invalid May 18 23:32:52 neo ntpd[12749]: 127.127.22.1 interface 127.0.0.1 -> (none) This means that atom support is not included. There are situations where it is preferred (e.g. when the gps nmea time sentences are way off so that you only want to use its pps signal with a regular ntp sources as a base). -- System Information: Debian Release: 8.0 APT prefers stable-updates APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 4.0.0-trunk-amd64 (SMP w/12 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) Versions of packages ntp depends on: ii adduser 3.113+nmu3 ii dpkg 1.17.25 ii libc62.19-18 ii libcap2 1:2.24-8 ii libedit2 3.1-20140620-2 ii libopts251:5.18.4-3 ii libssl1.0.0 1.0.1k-3 ii lsb-base 4.1+Debian13+nmu1 ii netbase 5.3 Versions of packages ntp recommends: ii perl 5.20.2-3 Versions of packages ntp suggests: pn ntp-doc -- Configuration Files: /etc/ntp.conf changed [not included] -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
