In message <40ED57F7-063E-4B7A-B404-8C4830C57E10_at_noao.edu>, Rob Seaman writes:
>On Jan 13, 2006, at 6:26 AM, Richard Langley wrote:
>I won't claim to know the intrinsic importance attached to this.
>Critical systems may depend on the information. But is it fair to
>sum up the situation by saying that a leap second triggered a couple
>of bugs (or perhaps one common bug), they were detected, have been
>fixed, and affected data products have been remediated? Also, it
>appears that some other data products were unaffected?
>
>So, the issue has been resolved - would likely have been resolved
>sooner if a leap second had occurred earlier - and is no longer
>directly pertinent to a discussion of future leap seconds?
Yeah, right
"This goes counter to my claims so it is of no importance".
Sorry, things don't work that way Rob.
--
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 14 2006 - 07:33:01 PST