> On Mar 5, 2015, at 6:30 PM, Joseph Gwinn <joegw...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 14:55:58 +0100, Martin Burnicki wrote: >> >> And we might already start to think about how to get this right in >> mixed environments, e.g. using the NTF's General timestamp API, or >> find a way to determine if the kernel time is UTC, or TAI. > > Yes. My experience is that it can be hard to get the time community to > agree on an approach, especially if the community must convince > non-time communities (like POSIX) to implement something perfect but > very complex, especially if it doesn't solve a problem important to > non-time folk.
The big problem with leap seconds are they are just a second. Nobody cares enough about a second to give it more than a passing thought. This is why so many things implement / spec leap seconds so poorly that bugs abound. Warner
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
