[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/
From: |
David Allouche |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/ |
Date: |
Fri, 10 Sep 2004 11:32:16 +0200 |
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 20:12 -0400, Phil Frost wrote:
> The difference between UTC
> and GMT will never be more than 0.9s, but I believe there is still some
> value in labeling the time with the correct timescale simply for the
> sake of being correct.
Since the date resolution is one second, both are equally correct.
Are you just being pedantic or did I miss something?
--
-- ddaa
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] s/GMT/UTC/, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] s/GMT/UTC/, Juliusz Chroboczek, 2004/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] s/GMT/UTC/, Jeremy Shaw, 2004/09/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] s/GMT/UTC/, Jan Hudec, 2004/09/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/, Miles Bader, 2004/09/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/, Jeremy Shaw, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/, Tom Lord, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/, Adrian Irving-Beer, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/, Matthieu Moy, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/, Phil Frost, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/, Miles Bader, 2004/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/,
David Allouche <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/, Zenaan Harkness, 2004/09/10
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: s/GMT/UTC/, Adrian Irving-Beer, 2004/09/10