Re: [LEAPSECS] Introduction of long term scheduling

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk_at_phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 22:43:50 +0000

In message <FEE8FB9C-DE61-438A-87CC-993CD111953D_at_semantic.org>, Ashley Yakeley
writes:

>Not necessarily. After seven months, or even after two years, there's
>a better chance that the product is still in active maintenance.
>Better to find that particular bug early, if someone's been so
>foolish as to hard-code a leap-second table. The bug here, by the
>way, is not that one particular leap second table is wrong. It's the
>assumption that any fixed table can ever be correct.

So you think it is appropriate to demand that ever computer with a
clock should suffer biannual software upgrades if it is not connected
to a network where it can get NTP or similar service ?

I know people who will disagree with you:

        Air traffic control
        Train control
        Hospitals

and the list goes on.

6 months is simply not an acceptable warning to get, end of story.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk_at_FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Sat Jan 06 2007 - 14:56:26 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 04 2010 - 09:44:55 PDT