On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:44:37AM +0200, Marco Marongiu wrote: > I understand that the leap second is not armed in the kernel if only the > warning is set. Rather, it seems that the warning is used by a client to > understand if it should believe its upstreams when they claim there will > be a leap second by this month. > > I think my interpretation is correct but I'd really appreciate if > someone could either confirm or clarify, so that I/we know exactly what > to expect.
I'm not sure what exactly are you asking here. Do you see in your testing or the source code something different from what is described in the document? -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
