On 11/17/2011 3:20 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp allegedly wrote:
Definition
A structured type expressing the absolute time in number
of seconds since Universal Co-ordinated Time (UTC), 00:00:00,
1st January 1970
This is abundantly clear--and leap-seconds are irrelevant, since
Poul-Henning Kamp said:
(Unix and ANSI-C format).
Doing that, it is immediately obvious to even the causual observer,
that the job of the parantheses is to settle any questions with
respect to leapseconds by saying Like UNIX, we don't have them.
But C does have them. Indeed, C90 allowed two
On Nov 17, 2011, at 4:20 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
We're having a bit of a project management scandal in Denmark related
to purchase of 83 IC4 trains.
I suspect I'm not the only American reading this wishing more of our scandals
were about trains...
Reasearching this, I have been reading
On 2011 Nov 17, at 05:31, Peter Vince wrote:
the lack of leap-seconds in most of Canada. How does that work?
It works like the javascript on this page
http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/epochtime.html
which risks restarting some totally pedantic and legalistic
arguments of the sort we're now
On 17 Nov 2011 at 11:20, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
But the really interesting thing to remember here, is that if you
asked the railroads about leap seconds, what are the chances you
would get somebody on the other end of the line, who knew that the
MVB standards would have to be revised, and
In message 4ec51a73.6664.2a84f...@dan.tobias.name, Daniel R. Tobias writes:
On 17 Nov 2011 at 11:20, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
It seems rather bizarre that they'd have to *change* a standard in
order to *keep on following* the standard that's been in effect since
1972, namely the use of leap
On Nov 17, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
On 17 Nov 2011 at 11:20, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
But the really interesting thing to remember here, is that if you
asked the railroads about leap seconds, what are the chances you
would get somebody on the other end of the line, who
On Nov 17, 2011, at 8:29 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
That's the problem with leap seconds in a nutshell, btw.
Nobody but extreme time geeks thinks about them. Nobody thinks they are
important. Nobody thinks that they matter.
They don't matter but civilization will topple if they exist? Cue
On Nov 17, 2011, at 8:02 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
First: I have an estimate on the recertification cost from a credible
industry source.
Citation? Methodology?
…and is recertification actually necessary given the circumstances? This is a
shell game. There is no equivalence between
On Nov 17, 2011, at 9:29 AM, Rob Seaman wrote:
On Nov 17, 2011, at 8:29 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
That's the problem with leap seconds in a nutshell, btw.
Nobody but extreme time geeks thinks about them. Nobody thinks they are
important. Nobody thinks that they matter.
They don't
On Thu 2011-11-17T06:49:59 -0800, Steve Allen hath writ:
It works like the javascript on this page
http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/epochtime.html
which risks restarting some totally pedantic and legalistic
arguments of the sort we're now seeing about POSIX and C time
because the
In message 3b099ba0-b740-4d80-998c-9dbc7d4ac...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Nov 17, 2011, at 8:02 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Real-world issues will occur whether or not they are aware of the issue and
whether or not they regard it as important.
I'm sorry to say it so bluntly, but you
On Nov 17, 2011, at 9:57 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
It is a problem with the current system.
No, it is a feature of the current solution. The problem is civil timekeeping.
The current solution is Coordinated Universal TIme, that is, mean solar time
(and the details we're all familiar with). A
In message 1f82f107-a699-4bc4-8e19-66bd9215f...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Nov 17, 2011, at 9:57 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
If the Danish railways [...]
You seem to have misunderstood something very fundamental here:
UIC is the International Union of Railroads. UIC 556 affects all
railroads
On Nov 17, 2011, at 10:41 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message 3b099ba0-b740-4d80-998c-9dbc7d4ac...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
Real-world issues will occur whether or not they are aware of the issue and
whether or not they regard it as important.
I'm sorry to say it so bluntly, but
On Nov 17, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
No, that means that all trains built in the last approx 10 years, are
built without handling for leap seconds.
Train systems are bigger than this one standard. Other aspects of their
logistics will exhibit different timekeeping behavior.
On Nov 17, 2011, at 10:21, Rob Seaman sea...@noao.edu wrote:
I've been following the list for a while and seen many examples of communities
and significant industries where leap seconds are causing problems (and just
stopping them with cause no new friction).
That you can't imagine that any
On 17 Nov, 2011, at 09:37 , Steve Allen wrote:
On Thu 2011-11-17T06:49:59 -0800, Steve Allen hath writ:
It works like the javascript on this page
http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/epochtime.html
which risks restarting some totally pedantic and legalistic
arguments of the sort we're now
On Nov 17, 2011, at 11:57 AM, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
I've been following the list for a while and seen many examples of
communities and significant industries where leap seconds are causing problems
But you've seen no investigations of the significance of the problems, and only
anecdotal
In message 4acea877-9c04-4e6d-a563-831ee17e9...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
And no evidence whatsoever that redefining UTC will not cause even bigger
problems for these same communities and industries. Nobody has looked.
Just like there is no evidence that it would cause any trouble at all to
On 2011-11-17, at 19:57, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
Count me in with the uninformed then and please help inform us. (Just to be
clear here; I'm completely serious - I understand the general concept of
course, but I genuinely don't understand the specific use cases for having
leap seconds).
On 11/17/2011 6:30 AM, Daniel R. Tobias allegedly wrote:
It seems rather bizarre that they'd have to *change* a standard in
order to *keep on following* the standard that's been in effect since
1972, namely the use of leap seconds.
Yeah. I'd have to track down the FRA references, but when I
Actual stuff? There's a whole other sermon…
These are tools for characterizing an actual effect in the actual sky that
will affect actual operations of the Air Force Space Command.
The proceedings are being finalized and should be available next week. In the
mean time feel free to read
On 2011-11-17, at 21:56, Warner Losh wrote:
On Nov 17, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Nero Imhard wrote:
I would say that the use case is quite irrelevant. The use case dictates the
choice of time scale, not the other way. Fundamentally changing the
definition of a time scale is an insult to those
On Thu 2011-11-17T21:38:56 +, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ:
Hence the pretty much any, in addition to MVS, I only know one
other operating system which is configured to deal with leapseconds
by default.
That feature evolved from IBM S/390 into z/OS.
The manual which describes how to use it
25 matches
Mail list logo
