Supposedly leap seconds are going to be formally abandoned in a little
more than a decade; but that conveniently ignores the vagaries of the
earth's wobbling, which are not deterministic, so it's just a different
kind of folly by our fellow meat puppets.
On 12/22/2022 23:13 PM, James Browning
> On 12/22/2022 7:49 PM PST Hal Murray via devel wrote:
>
>
> Fred Wright said:
> > If you make it 24 hours, there's the question of whether that means 86400
> > seconds or 86401. :-)
>
> That ones easy. It's 86400 smeared seconds and 86401 real seconds.
>
> That's the whole point of smearing.
Fred Wright said:
> If you make it 24 hours, there's the question of whether that means 86400
> seconds or 86401. :-)
That ones easy. It's 86400 smeared seconds and 86401 real seconds.
That's the whole point of smearing. :)
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
_
Fred Wright said:
> Any sane implementation of NTP ought to perform all synchronization on the
> TAI timescale, with conversions between TAI and UTC being part of the I/O.
> Using leap-smeared time on the wire makes this mapping inconsistent.
I agree, but most of the world is stuck with POSIX p
Yo Fred!
On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 17:00:37 -0800 (PST)
Fred Wright via devel wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2022, Hal Murray via devel wrote:
>
> > Google says:
> > https://developers.google.com/time/smear
> > We encourage anyone smearing leap seconds to use a 24-hour linear
> > smear from noon to noon U
Fred Wright said:
> IIRC you put in a Linux-specific hack to allow building against a
> non-default OpenSSL, but it's not very general. If it were fixed to honor
> pkgconfig (which is nontrivial to do correctly), then on any platform all
> one would have to do for an alternate OpenSSL is to poin
On Wed, 21 Dec 2022, Hal Murray via devel wrote:
Google says:
https://developers.google.com/time/smear
We encourage anyone smearing leap seconds to use a 24-hour linear smear from
noon to noon UTC.
There were earlier versions which did sine rather than linear.
Hmm. I don't recall any non
On Wed, 21 Dec 2022, Fred Wright via devel wrote:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2022, Hal Murray wrote:
I guess if you don't see the issue I'll have to look more closely; I
thought
you might "just know" the problem.
Does git head work on 3.0?
Yes. I think it gets confused when the OpenSSL version it's
