Subject: Re: What's the issue with vs. "ntpd"?
To: Frederick Bruckman <email@example.com>
From: Simon Burge <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/17/2003 11:57:51
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 11:45:12AM -0500, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> I'm on a mission to get NetBSD's changes to ntpd merged into the main
> distribution, and I'm finally starting to get a handle on it. There is
> this one thing about which I have no clue. You elided all possibility
> of including <ieeefp.h> with this commit message:
> date: 2000/05/03 06:08:45; author: simonb; state: Exp; lines: +12 -0
> Fix the <ieeefp.h> problem a different way - nothing actually uses the
> contents of that header (the only file that includes it compiles to the
> same object code on multiple architectures with or without including
> <ieeefp.h>), so remove all references to it.
> Fix sent to NTP maintainers - they will probably implement this change
> after the immenient 4.1.0 release, but don't want to change it so close
> Do you, or does anyone, remember what the problem was, or what the
> other way of fixing it was? It's still included in ntp_utils.c in
> ntp-dev, but there are other changes to the way floating point is used
> in that file that may (or may not) make it irrelevant. Will someone
> please enlighten me?
I _think_ that the problem is that vax doesn't have an <ieeefp.h> since
it doesn't do IEEE FP. My memory is hazy on this though...
Simon Burge <email@example.com>
NetBSD Development, Support and Service: http://www.wasabisystems.com/