[LEAPSECS] presentations from AAS Future of Time sessions

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <52D2FE51.40000 at cox.net>, Greg Hennessy writes:

>On 01/12/2014 02:47 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

>> In message <52D20BEB.60709 at edlmax.com>, Brooks Harris writes:

>>

>>

>>> Yes, in my opinion its unfortunate they chose to use the term "UTC" in

>>> that context.

>>

>> They chose UTC because they meant UTC.

>>

>> I have this directly from multiple persons who were involved back

>> then, including Dennis Ritchie who gave me the full sordid details

>> about the early UNIX' requirement of weekly recompiles to update

>> the epoch of the timekeeping.

>

>If they chose UTC because they meant UTC, then why do the

>man pages refer not to UTC, but to GMT?

>

>http://cm.bell-labs.com/7thEdMan/vol1/man2.bun


Dennis specifically said UTC to me.

Not that it makes any difference, GMT and UTC were considered the
same thing until all this talk about dropping leapseconds started.

-- 
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.