On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 19:00:56 EDT erik quanstrom <[email protected]> wrote: > > > correct. plan 9 does not bother with leap seconds. > > > > seconds(1) "handles" leap seconds in that it will not crash > > when it encounters them -- it accepts that sometimes there > > are 61 seconds in a minute. > > i'm not sure if we're talking past each other, or making different points. > but either way, i should clarify. > > by "not handling leap seconds" i mean there is no code in ctime() to add > in leap seconds from an external source at the appropriate unix times. > so e.g. gmtime could read e.g. /lib/leapseconds and ajust seconds similar > to days (/sys/src/libc/9sys/ctime.c:137,138).
I was mistaken. Turns out neither do Unix systems handle leapseconds. Now if only ITU punts on leapseconds in 2015, we can let some future generation worry about leap minutes or hours! Sorry for the noise.
