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

[E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists]

On 12/18/2014 4:01 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote:> E-Mail Sent to this address will be added to the BlackLists writes:
>>> Somebody wrote:
>>>> So it should not be a problem to include something like
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>> #elif defined ( LINUX ) || defined( FREEBSD )
>>>>   #include <timepps.h>
>>>> #endif
>
> Why would FREEBSD be included in that clause?  FreeBSD comes with
> /usr/include/sys/timepps.h that works just fine, and furthermore the
> header file you cite includes linux/types.h which does not exist under
> most FreeBSD machines.  This causes me to doubt that this suggestion has
> been properly tested.
>
> If we do this, the file would be called (and #include'd as)
> timepps-linux.h .  It will *not* be called timepps.h .

I didn't test anything;
 It was a listing of existing NTP timepps includes code,
  and a example / question to Martin & Rob, about what / how they
  were trying to accomplish NTP's inclusion of a time pps header file
  {like the ones included for sun / solaris and win NT)
  for generic linux {that apparently also doesn't usually have
  the necessary file}.


> That file is OK as GPL2.  If it is ever upgraded and goes to GPL3, it
> will be *removed* from the distribution if it does not include a license
> exception.

... didn't someone just say licenses were not an issue,
 when I pointed out they might be in a previous post ;-p

-- 
E-Mail Sent to this address <BlackList at Anitech-Systems.com>
  will be added to the BlackLists.