[ntp:questions] NTP & PPS, part 2 ;)

Rob nomail at example.com
Sat Dec 13 09:47:50 UTC 2014


Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.org> wrote:
> Rob writes:
>> Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.org> wrote:
>> > Rob writes:
>> >> Harlan Stenn <stenn at ntp.org> wrote:
>> >> > If you disgree and think NTP should provide the file all the time, then:
>> >> >
>> >> > - how do you propose we find out if the underlying API is really
>> >> > provided in the currently-running kernel?
>> >> 
>> >> The source of the includefile does absolutely nothing in the ways of
>> >> solving that problem!
>> >
>> > If the file isn't there we don't go looking for the API that isn't
>> > there, either.
>> >
>> > Or am I missing something?
>> 
>> The file is only used at build time.  It tells absolutely nothing
>> about the kernel configuration, certainly not in the system the binary
>> is running on.
>
> You and I have completely different understandings about how APIs work
> and what this header file is used for.
>
> So you want *us* to add kernel-specific files to live along side
> include/timepps-{SCO,Solaris,SunOS}.h, except you want *us* to deal with
> tracking any changes caused by kernel updates?  It's interesting enough
> that we have to do this for Windows.

I am not commenting on the "whoe provides what" but on your claim that
using an available timepps.h would do anything to detect if the PPS API
is available on the system.



More information about the questions mailing list