In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Allen writes:
>On Sat 2007-01-06T19:36:19 +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ:
>> There are two problems:
>>         1. We get too short notice about leap-seconds.
>>         2. POSIX and other standards cannot invent their UTC timescales.
>This is not fair, for there is a more fundamental problem:

Yes, this is perfectly fair, this is all the problems there are.

And furthermore, the two plans I outlined represent the only
two kinds of plans there are for solving this.

They can be varied for various sundry and unsundry purposes, such
as the "leap-hour" fig-leaf and similar, but there are only
two classes of solutions.

>No two clocks can ever stay in agreement.

This is not relevant.  It's not a matter of clock precision or
clock stability.  It's only a matter of how they count.

>Yes, there is a cost of doing time right, and leap seconds are not to
>blame for that cost.  They are a wake up call from the state of denial.

Now, it can be equally argued, that leap seconds implement a state
of denial with respect to a particular lump of rocks ability as
timekeeper, so I suggest we keep that part of the discussion closed
for now.

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED]         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

Reply via email to