On 14 Sep 2013, at 16:20, "Poul-Henning Kamp" <[email protected]> wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>, Ian Batten > wri > tes: >> >> On 13 Sep 2013, at 14:57, Steve Allen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> In stark contrast to the usual ITU-R pattern and the previous workshop >>> held by BIPM at the Royal Society, the presentations for next week's >>> workshop in Geneva are being published >>> >>> http://www.itu.int/oth/R0A0E000096/en >>> >>> As Mike Meyers used to say "Talk amongst yourselves". >> >> The Japanese presentation is genuinely deranged. > > And you totally missed, purely by accident I pressume, the bit about > leap-seconds happening during business-days there, right ? Of course, n a country in which the timezone is UTC+9, it will be 0900 on July 1 when a leapsecond set for 23:59:60 June 30 fires. That makes an outage starting 0925 and finishing 2241 (both JST) on June 30 even more fascinating as a case of an operating taking different codepaths for an impending leap second. What kernels even have an interface to accept this information? What codepaths will be different 23:35 before a leap second? Perhaps the presentation as delivered will be more convincing, but just pointing to system outage in a 48 hour window either side of a leapsecond and say "look! it was the leapseconds that did it!" is not hugely convincing. ian _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
