rwmaillists at googlemail.com
Wed May 29 14:13:20 UTC 2013
On Wed, 29 May 2013 12:04:47 +0100
Chris Rees wrote:
> On 29 May 2013 07:13, "Matthew Seaman" <matthew at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > Right. The fact that on very rare occasions a minute may not have
> > 60 seconds in it plus many other corner cases in calculating the
> > current wall-clock time is an amusing irrelevance.
And in any case where you cared about the leap second, you would
probably care that sleep doesn't wake-up on a second boundary, and
can end-up in the next second.
> OK, but is this really something the OS should handle? I'm sure sleep
> `expr 3600 \* 2` will suffice and is perfectly readable, including
> being more portable.
More information about the freebsd-questions