On Jan 13, 2014, at 1:54 PM, John Hawkinson wrote:
> In other news, the count of the number of times in this thread folks
> have said "Universal Time Coordinated" instead of "Coordinated
> Universal Time" is higher than I would expect. (Coordinated Universal
> Time is the proper expansion of UTC,
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote on Mon, 13 Jan 2014
at 16:03:28 + in <86897.1389629...@critter.freebsd.dk>:
> I don't think he told me exactly what representation they used
> before time_t became 32bit*seconds, but prior to that, the wrap-around
> of timestamps was prevented only by the kernel crashe
On 2014-01-13 09:29 AM, Michael Deckers wrote:
On 2014-01-12 03:28, Brooks Harris quoted from RFC 5905:
Then, and very importantly, Figure 4: Interesting Historic NTP Dates
states the relationship to "First day UNIX" -
+-++-+---+--+
On 2014-01-12 03:28, Brooks Harris quoted from RFC 5905:
Then, and very importantly, Figure 4: Interesting Historic NTP Dates
states the relationship to "First day UNIX" -
+-++-+---+--+
| Date| MJD| NTP | NTP Timestam
In message <8d282b74-4172-4888-8581-9f197314a...@bsdimp.com>, Warner Losh write
s:
>The other PTTI docs I posted show that the Navy (USNO) was ordered to =
>provide technical assistance to the USCG in synchronizing the master =
>clocks at the LORAN stations in 1960.
The LORSTA veterans website (
In message <5036fb31-5cb7-46a6-949e-5534441fe...@bsdimp.com>, Warner Losh write
s:
>> The development was concurrent, not sequential. Unix 1st and 2nd edition
>> had a 1971 epoch and 1/60th second resolution. 3rd edition moved the epoch
>> to 1972.
According to Dennis Ritchie what happened was th
On Jan 13, 2014, at 8:11 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>> So seeing "GMT" in early Unix documents doesn't necessarily mean what
>> you think it means, especially given the first hand accounts of
>> participants on this list who specifically asked the people that
>> originally wr
On Jan 13, 2014, at 2:30 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message , Warner Losh
> write
> s:
>
>> http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a280955.pdf Perhaps these
>> documents will prove useful in working out TAI's origin, but it seems
>> that LORAN-C started in 1958, and so did TAI time's
Warner Losh wrote:
>
> So seeing "GMT" in early Unix documents doesn't necessarily mean what
> you think it means, especially given the first hand accounts of
> participants on this list who specifically asked the people that
> originally wrote it what the intention behind the words was. POSIX
> c
Greg Hennessy wrote:
> On 01/12/2014 05:12 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> > GMT and UTC were used interchangeably well into the 1990s, especially in
> > publication not subject to peer review of subject experts...
>
> People still use them interchangeably TODAY, however the people doing so are
> incor
On Jan 13, 2014, at 7:49 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> Brooks Harris wrote:
>
>> You are saying that UTC as a term for the adjusted timescale existed as
>> the process of time-keeping in computers began and they intended
>> computers to reflect "civil time" even if the details of exactly how to
>> do
On Jan 12, 2014, at 10:57 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
> I have not found any TAI-UT1 data, but it is probably hidden in some
> obscurity considering the labs being involved. Would be a nice find to make.
The BIPM site has this one one of the obscure back-water portions. I have never
found it wi
On Jan 12, 2014, at 9:31 PM, Dennis Ferguson wrote:
> I don't think the fact that they called it "GMT" at that point tells you
> anything since referring to UTC as "GMT" was pretty common in the US at
> the time. Even the NBS did it. WWV voice announcements referred to the time
> being transmitt
Brooks Harris wrote:
> You are saying that UTC as a term for the adjusted timescale existed as
> the process of time-keeping in computers began and they intended
> computers to reflect "civil time" even if the details of exactly how to
> do that hadn't been worked out. "Modern" UTC, UTC with Leap
Joseph Gwinn wrote:
>
> GMT is now (unofficially?) deemed to be UT1.
GMT is the official name for UK civil time during the winter. The law
seems to specify an astronomical definition for GMT, but official time
signals in the UK are synchronized to UTC, and astronomical GMT has not
been maintained
In message , Warner Losh write
s:
>http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a280955.pdf Perhaps these
>documents will prove useful in working out TAI's origin, but it seems
>that LORAN-C started in 1958, and so did TAI time's EPOCH, so there's a
>strong inference to be made at the connection bet
In message <52d38720.4000...@rubidium.dyndns.org>, Magnus Danielson writes:
>What CCITT recommendation are you refering to?
>
>It was CCIR that did the broadcasting recommendations that we keep
>refering to.
And that's what I'm talking about.
The reason UTC got put on radio was that it was "one
17 matches
Mail list logo
