Too many merge requests

James Browning jamesb192 at
Sun Oct 15 15:21:16 UTC 2023

> On 10/14/2023 7:16 PM PDT Hal Murray <halmurray at> wrote:
> James said:
> > MR 1333 should address the issue where every response in an mssntp-restricted
> > subnet gets lost in ntp_signd.
> Is there any reason to approve it now when we don't know if it works yet?

I have tested it a bit; It prevents non-MSSNTP traffic from getting
sucked into ntp_signd and vanishing. Errors in ntp_singd generate an
error message or two. Hopefully, anyone tripping over this in the
future will help us debug it rather than just looking at the Samba
Wiki crapping on us and leaving.

> Are all the changes inside an #ifdef?  (and thus unlikely to break normal 
> operations)

Yes, #ifdefs contain all of it except for maybe_log() and struct
do_we_log, which I see as having potential uses besides ntp_signd.

> > MR 1331 addresses several issues with ntpdig and MAC handling. 
> I hate big python programs.  It would be nice if somebody else took a look at 
> that one.

I asked Matt Selsky to merge it in early August and am still waiting
to hear back.

> > MR 1325 holds lost patches.
> What does "lost patches" mean.? If they are useful, it will be much easier to 
> approve them if they are split up -- one problem will hold up the whole 
> collection.

Ah, let me rephrase: I have almost given up on them ever being
merged. MR 1325 has 48 patches in /patchsets. 11 are standalone
patches, and the rest are in 9 patch chains.

More information about the devel mailing list