In message: <20060102211956.GA10928_at_merlin.emma.line.org> Matthias Andree <matthias.andree_at_gmx.de> writes: : On Mon, 02 Jan 2006, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: : : > In message <m3psnagxrb.fsf_at_merlin.emma.line.org>, Matthias Andree writes: : > : > >And tell me one reason why the leap second must be discontinued while : > >the leap day (Feb 29th) can be carried on. It's the same story, : > >irregular rollover, inserting one particular unit of time. : > : > You are clearly not thinking rationally here. : > : > I know already now that year 2048 will be a leap year, but I still : > don't know if there will be a leap second on june 30th 2006. : : And you can predict the DST rules for all major countries for 2048? Who : says the EU won't discontinue DST effective 2008? We don't know yet. : : You suggest UTC needs to be used because civil time matters, yet at the : same time UTC were broken, and thus POSIX were broken, but could not be : blamed for picking UTC. : : Leap days (called leap year, to compensate for earth orbiting the sun), : leap hours (called daylight savings time, completely artificial); aren't : questioned, but leap seconds are. : : Is it just me who sees inconsistencies in your argumentation here? No. UTC has no timezones, so is nearly predictable for long stretches of time. Leap seconds are a random pertebtation that can only be known as a table. Leap days are know for the next several thousand years. : No offense, but I simply don't get your point. Another question: Did you : mean to write "FreeBSD handles leapsecond in POSIX compliance" for the : subject? FreeBSD did it right. End of story. WarnerReceived on Tue Jan 03 2006 - 04:20:09 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:50 UTC