Well, no promises, but I am shooting for one of the next two releases
of OpenSolaris. A backport to Solaris 10 is a possibility, but not
highly probable. As for the version of NTP, I am constantly working
with the latest development release. At some I'll have to freeze that
of course. For polit
"David J Taylor"
writes:
>Unruh wrote:
>[]
>> OK, interesting if true. YOu are saying that if you cut the lighter
>> adapter
>> off, you should supply 4.5-5.5V But the unit claims to be serial port
>> device which has a nominal 12V output. I would expect that the power
>> supply would then
>> be
Unruh wrote:
> Steve Kostecke writes:
>> You're assuming that all computers / SBCs / Embedded Systems have a USB
>> port.
>
> Agreed, it you do not have a usb port, you cannot get power from it.
> Then you have to get power from elsewhere. Getting it from the serial port
> is almost certainly no
Unruh wrote:
[]
> OK, interesting if true. YOu are saying that if you cut the lighter
> adapter
> off, you should supply 4.5-5.5V But the unit claims to be serial port
> device which has a nominal 12V output. I would expect that the power
> supply would then
> be at least that.
Why not check the m
Brian Inglis writes:
>On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 23:17:37 GMT in comp.protocols.time.ntp, Unruh
> wrote:
>>Unruh writes:
>>No boards needed for usb or PC ( except for a 12V supply for the latter.
>>You could use a portable computer "brick" charger or even a cell phone
>>charger (if
>>you can find on
Danny Mayer wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>> On Jan 12, 3:22 am, Martin Burnicki
>> wrote:
>>> Chris,
>>>
>>> Chris wrote:
Out of curiosity, how much time was spent porting ntpd to compile in
win32? Since it appears the project is closed source, I'm interested
in porting it myself.
>>> Just
Danny Mayer wrote:
> Martin Burnicki wrote:
>> as already mentioned I hust wanted to save you some work since you've
>> still got so many other things on your todo list ...
>>
>> Martin
>
> If you want to do this part, sure, go ahead. The other part I will do,
> which is to enumerate the IPv4 and
Chris wrote:
> On Jan 12, 3:22 am, Martin Burnicki
> wrote:
>> Chris,
>>
>> Chris wrote:
>>> Out of curiosity, how much time was spent porting ntpd to compile in
>>> win32? Since it appears the project is closed source, I'm interested
>>> in porting it myself.
>> Just for completeness, we at Meinb
Martin Burnicki wrote:
> Danny Mayer wrote:
>
>> Martin Burnicki wrote:
>>> Danny,
>>>
>>> I think I still have the dynamic DLL function import code lying around.
>>> Should I try to add it to the current ntp-dev so you just had to care
>>> about calling the functions and evaluating the results to
"Q" <@..> wrote:
> I would of thought that a S1 server with an S0 GPS device would of been
> 'quite' by now. We shall see what happens come the end of the month.
If it only had the refclock configured it probably would be. The problem
comes from peer servers which pass the leap bits around
On Jan 11, 6:52 pm, Unruh wrote:
> And alter your script so that it does not try to write any file on today or
> earlier. Or test to see if peerstats and peerstats.20090201 are the same
> file (same inode with ls -li)
>
This is a good idea. I have changed my script and it seems to work
now:
#!/b
On Jan 13, 9:29 pm, David Woolley
wrote:
> You should be very wary of any frequently written file on flash RAM.
Even if you constantly write with maximum speed to the SD card it will
take around 2 years until the minimum write cycle count is reached.
_
Dave Hart wrote:
> On Jan 13, 5:39 am, Steve Kostecke wrote:
>> On 2009-01-13, Dave Hart wrote:
>>
>> > Just build a binary that requires WinXP/Windows Server 2003 or
>>
>> The NTP Project releases The NTP Reference Implementation only as source
>> code.
>>
>> Steve Kostecke
>> NTP Public Servic
Danny Mayer wrote:
> Martin Burnicki wrote:
>> Danny,
>>
>> I think I still have the dynamic DLL function import code lying around.
>> Should I try to add it to the current ntp-dev so you just had to care
>> about calling the functions and evaluating the results to see if IPv6 is
>> supported? Th
David Woolley wrote:
> Heiko Gerstung wrote:
>
>> In the NTPv4 draft you will find a (similar) definition: Root dispersion
>> indicates the maximum error, that does not necessarily mean that this is
>> the current error.
>
> And maximum error means theoretical worst case, not that this value has
15 matches
Mail list logo
