Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 22:19:10 -0700 (MST) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: matthias.andree@gmx.de Cc: phk@phk.freebsd.dk, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD handles leapsecond correctly Message-ID: <20060102.221910.122060994.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20060102211956.GA10928@merlin.emma.line.org> References: <m3psnagxrb.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> <80432.1136235223@critter.freebsd.dk> <20060102211956.GA10928@merlin.emma.line.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <20060102211956.GA10928@merlin.emma.line.org>
Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> writes:
: On Mon, 02 Jan 2006, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
:
: > In message <m3psnagxrb.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org>, Matthias Andree writes:
: >
: > >And tell me one reason why the leap second must be discontinued while
: > >the leap day (Feb 29th) can be carried on. It's the same story,
: > >irregular rollover, inserting one particular unit of time.
: >
: > You are clearly not thinking rationally here.
: >
: > I know already now that year 2048 will be a leap year, but I still
: > don't know if there will be a leap second on june 30th 2006.
:
: And you can predict the DST rules for all major countries for 2048? Who
: says the EU won't discontinue DST effective 2008? We don't know yet.
:
: You suggest UTC needs to be used because civil time matters, yet at the
: same time UTC were broken, and thus POSIX were broken, but could not be
: blamed for picking UTC.
:
: Leap days (called leap year, to compensate for earth orbiting the sun),
: leap hours (called daylight savings time, completely artificial); aren't
: questioned, but leap seconds are.
:
: Is it just me who sees inconsistencies in your argumentation here?
No. UTC has no timezones, so is nearly predictable for long stretches
of time. Leap seconds are a random pertebtation that can only be
known as a table. Leap days are know for the next several thousand
years.
: No offense, but I simply don't get your point. Another question: Did you
: mean to write "FreeBSD handles leapsecond in POSIX compliance" for the
: subject?
FreeBSD did it right. End of story.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060102.221910.122060994.imp>