[ntp:questions] FreeBSD 7.3, net4501, ntpd & gpsd?
gsan.news at mailnull.com
Tue Oct 5 21:07:16 UTC 2010
On 2010-10-05 21:41, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Sandin?=<gsan.news at mailnull.com>
>> Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 19:59:07 +0200
>> Sender: questions-bounces+oberman=es.net at lists.ntp.org
>> On 2010-10-05 18:48, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>>>> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Sandin?=<gsan.news at mailnull.com>
>>>> Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 18:15:11 +0200
>>>> Sender: questions-bounces+oberman=es.net at lists.ntp.org
>>>> On 2010-10-05 16:48, Hans Jørgen Jakobsen wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 20:29:51 GMT, Goran Sandin wrote:
>>>>>> When I start ntpd I get these two comments in /var/log/messages:
>>>>>> refclock_newpeer: clock type 28 invalid
>>>>>> configuration of 127.127.28.0 failed
>>>>> Clock 28 not compiled into binary.
>>>> OK, I suspected something like that.
>>>> If I check /usr/ports/net/ntp, it shows NTP 4.2.6p1.r5 (i.e. not the
>>>> same as the package I use). Make showconfig does not reveal any options
>>>> to include clock 28.
>>>> How do I tell the port to include clock 28 (if possible)?
>>> You need to build ntpd (or the whole port) with REFCLOCK and CLOCK_SHM
>> Thanks Kevin,
>> but still, if I do 'make config', I only see three options; NTPSNMPD,
>> RAWDCF& SSL.
>> How do I build the port with other options?
>> questions mailing list
>> questions at lists.ntp.org
> I'm sorry. I guess I was not clear. These are not options settable via
> the 'make config'. (I'd like it if they were, though.) They are compiler
> defines. You can do the defines in any of several different ways.
It's ok, I forgot to mention that I'm a newbie to FreeBSD. So far I've
only setup things through packages and ports. ntp was though the reason
to select FreeBSD at all so I'm willing to learn and glad for the
> I suggest running 'make configure' (not 'make config') and then cd to the
> work/ntp-VERSION directory and editing the config.h file to uncomment
> the line for CLOCK_SHM. Then just cd ../.. and make, make install clean
I think it actually might look OK even without changing anything in the
Running 'make clean configure' shows:
checking for SHM clock attached thru shared memory... yes
checking if we need basic refclock support... yes
To me it looks like there might be a difference in what was compiled in
to the binary package and what seems to be default for the port (also
noted is that the package and the port are from different versions).
I didn't try this before so I will make a package of this port and make
a new build for the compact flash and test how it works. However, that
will have to be tomorrow.
Many thanks for the help so far.
More information about the questions