[ntp:questions] Attn Linux distributors - pse include PPS

Rob nomail at example.com
Wed Apr 30 15:09:02 UTC 2014

Martin Burnicki <martin.burnicki at meinberg.de> wrote:
> David Taylor schrieb:
>> On 29/04/2014 15:35, Rob wrote:
>> []
>>> But with a modular approach you would not need to rebuild to add
>>> a standard refclock, that would just be the installation of another
>>> package containing the precompiled refclock or refclock bundle.
>>> That is no different from having a program like Perl as a base, and
>>> a lot of packages containing Perl modules for specific tasks.
>>> The advantage would be that one can actually ADD an own refclock
>>> without having to go through long and painful discussions with
>>> package maintainers.
>>> Or in the case discussed in this thread, one could compile a single
>>> refclock that was omitted due to distributor oversight, and keep
>>> the remainder of ntpd standard and candidate for automatic updates.
>>> Even when the whole thing (ntpd and refclocks) would be distributed
>>> in a single package, it would be possible to add new refclocks to
>>> that.
>> I agree it sound nice in theory, but you need to find a mechanism which
>> is supported in all the operating systems which NTP supports, and
>> document how the users can add ref clocks.  To me, it's all completely
>> unnecessary - the number of folk /adding/ ref-clocks must be far smaller
>> than those /using/ ref-clocks!
> Ack.
>  From my experience having to install several packages depending on 
> whether you're going to use refclocks or not will cause more confusion 
> to "normal" users than it provided benefit for someone.

Note that splitting the program into separate modules for main function
and refclocks does not mean that those modules have to be distributed
in separate packages.

More information about the questions mailing list