[LEAPSECS] Leap seconds have a larger context than POSIX

[Hal Murray]

tvb said:
> There's no ambiguity. Those are just bugs. No software should depend on  more
> than 1 month notice of a leap second and no software should be  fooled if the
> notice is months or even years in advance. 

There are plenty of quirks in ntp code along that line.  The APIs don't have 
an explicit when.  The NTP-Kernal API for leap-pending is leap-tonight.  You 
have most of the next day to turn it off.  The leap-pending on the wire is 
leap-at-the-end-of-this-month.

I fixed a bug in the Z3801 driver by ignoring a leap pending unless it was 
June or December.  It's a hack, but it gets the job done and the code wasn't 
setup to ask it when the leap would happen.


tvb said:
> If you're writing a FAQ or best practices guide stay in touch. I have a
> semi-technical leap second report in the works. UTC is actually very  simple;
> but it's been complicated by untold levels of bad assumptions,  bad
> execution, and bad prose. 

Are you going to say anything about POSIX?


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.