On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 07:18:29AM +0200, Patrik Fältström wrote: > I want as potential fixes which I think are doable: > > - an updated POSIX definition where the variable which holds the > number of seconds since the epoch when converting back and forth to > date actually will hold the number of seconds since the epoch. So we should... brigade the Open Group? > - a slot in the NTP protocol not used today include the number of leap > seconds so people get to know that. > > FWIW I am a person that is against smear. I think a clock must be able > to give the correct time and that timestamps should be correct. Either > in seconds (and fractions of seconds) since the epoch or in correct > date and time UTC. Both are increasing all the time. And because of > that smear should not have to happen. +1 > That said, I am not against a BCP explaining the issues due to for > example the broken POSIX specification (which makes it hard to "do the > right thing" in software). Sure. Nico --