On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 14:57:45 +1200 Yuri de Groot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > thanks for the source extract which, returning to my > > original point, clearly shows that pacific/auckland is a > > distinctly different *location* to that of nz. using the > > rule of thumb which seems to be operating here i assume > > it'd be ok for londoners to choose any of those locations > > which are running on GMT as their timezone - because it > > worked? > > IMHO, yes. As long as the tz selected has the same DST > rules. > > I chose pacific/auckland when I installed mdk 9.1 bcoz I > thought > "I'm in the pacific, and auckland is the nearest big city". > > I thought this was the correct tz, since the 'date' cmd on > my box puts "NZST" or "NZDT" after the time, and it > automagically > adjusts by 1 hour twice a year. > > I didn't know before I read this thread that there exists a > place > called "Auckland Islands" (although I have heard of Las > Islas Malvinas). For the last time Pacific/Auckland timezone HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE AUCKLAND ISLANDS. (except that they probably use it too.) topic over, the correct setting for new zealand is Pacific/Auckland. It changed from being called NZ to Pacific/Auckland in about 1993 according to the source code. On my machine the NZ file is the same as Pacific/Auckland, but I guess that like all these things the old name (NZ) may dispappear at some time. > > IIRC there was no "NZ" option in the Mdk 9.1 set-up. > > Yuri > -- Nick Rout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
