>> >BTW, iirc, there is a good, technical reason to spend at least some
>> >time in 'time zone related' maintenance even if you care nothing for
>> >actual time zone changes: leap seconds.  the list of them comes from
>> >the time zone package too, does it not?
>> 
>> ah...leap seconds.
>> 
>> http://clockdev.usno.navy.mil/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0009&L=leapsecs&F=lf&S=&P=2658
>
>eh?  I didn't see anything at that URL that seemed particularly
>relevant.  I mean, it'd be great if they actually resolve -- some time
>after 2003 -- to solve the leap seconds problem in a better way... but
>even that doesn't help until after 2003.

true...

>(If you were trying -- quoting the wrong URL -- to say "you can find
>that information on the web," well, then not only did you fail, but
>the point was, that information is necessary to have on-system in
>order to properly present UTC... 8-)

no...i was quoting the right url.  i was just trying to imply that
leap seconds might be done away with.

whatever.  this is becoming a dead horse.

-- 
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org             * "ah!  i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"
andrew@crossbar.com       * "information is power -- share the wealth."