[ntp:questions] ntpd, boot time, and hot plugging

Per Hedeland per at hedeland.org
Sat Feb 5 21:02:39 UTC 2005


In article <mailman.51.1107569102.583.questions at lists.ntp.isc.org> Brad
Knowles <brad at stop.mail-abuse.org> writes:
>At 8:10 PM +0000 2005-02-04, Per Hedeland wrote:
>
>>  And yet you have failed to describe a single one.
>
>	As I said, the weaknesses are legion, and I think they've been 
>adequately described in the past.  I've had a few misconceptions of 
>my own that have been cleared up, but not many.

No, the weaknesses of ntpdate are essentially in your mind - see my
response to Dave Mills in another branch of the thread for what the real
problems are, and try to remember that the next time you have the urge
to parrot the party line.

>>  Apropos threads, the broken gatewaying from "ntp:questions" into the
>>  newsgroup is wreaking havoc with the threading - if whoever is
>>  responsible for it is reading, please fix.
>
>	Broken in what way?  Please provide evidence of your claims.

I can't say that I've done any extensive research into that beyond
noting the obvious and gratuitous mangling of the Subject line, nor do I
intend to, but this is what my newsreader (trn - the definition of a
threading newsreader) shows when asked to display the tree for this
thread:

[2] [ntp:questions] Re: ntpd, boot time, and hot plugging
[3] Reply to:
[4] [ntp:questions] Reply to:
[5] [Fwd: Re: [ntp:questions] ntpd, boot time, and hot plugging]
[6] [ntp:questions] ntpd, boot time, and hot plugging

  (1)+-(1)
     |-(6)+-(6)--(6)
     |    \-(6)
     \-(1)--(1)+-(2)+-(2)+-(2)
               |    |    \-(2)--(2)+-(2)--(2)
               |    |              |-(2)+-(2)+-(2)--(2)
               |    |              |    |    |-(2)--(2)+-(2)
               |    |              |    |    |         \-(2)
               |    |              |    |    |-(2)--(2)--(2)--(2)+-(2)--(2)--(2)+-(2)
               |    |              |    |    |                   |              \-(2)
               |    |              |    |    |                   |-( )+-(3)
               |    |              |    |    |                   |    \-( )--(4)
               |    |              |    |    |                   \-(2)
               |    |              |    |    \-(2)--(2)--(2)--(2)+-(2)--(2)
               |    |              |    |                        \-(2)
               |    |              |    \-(2)--(2)+-(2)
               |    |              |              \-(2)
               |    |              |-( )--(2)
               |    |              \-(2)--(2)--(2)
               |    |-(2)+-(2)
               |    |    \-(2)--(2)+-(2)
               |    |              \-(2)
               |    \-(2)--(2)--(2)
               |-( )--( )--(2)+-(2)
               |              \-(2)
               |-(1)--(1)+-(2)
               |         |-(1)
               |         \-( )+-(2)
               |              \-( )--(2)--(2)--[2]
               \-(1)
  (5)
  ( )--(5)+-(5)--(5)
          \-(5)+-(6)
               \-( )--(6)--(6)+-(6)--(6)--(6)--(6)--(6)--(6)--(6)--(6)
                              \-( )--( )--( )--(6)

I.e. what should be a simple, single thread with two Subjects has been
broken up into three threads with five Subjects, and there are incorrect
indications of lots of missing articles. Granted, there are limitations
to what a mail->news gateway can do in the face of non-RFC2822-compliant
MUAs, but surely it can be better than this. Primarily it seems the
construction of the References: header has severe problems. Stripping
out the "[ntp:questions]" garbage would also significantly improve the
situation.

--Per Hedeland
per at hedeland.org



More information about the questions mailing list