From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 16:34:55 +0200
From: tlaronde@polynum.com
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Message-ID: <20130423143454.GA461@polynum.com>
References: <20130423133003.GB19997@polynum.com>
	<0a19e826eda9d8a748239ae8b38a9cb8@brasstown.quanstro.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0a19e826eda9d8a748239ae8b38a9cb8@brasstown.quanstro.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Subject: Re: [9fans] Date woes
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 461a490c-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 09:34:46AM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
> is an independent /env for each process group, so it is entirely
> possible to have many values on the same system.

But this may affect the way the date is displayed, not the UTC?

>
> 3.  i think timesync(8) may have the information you're looking for.
>

Thanks for the tip. I have added it to my profile.

I have read too rtc(3) and cons(3).

And I wonder if somewhere I have a:

cat /dev/rtc >/dev/time

because it seems that it uses timezone in between to convert the value
passed according to the timezone, hence, with an rtc in UTC, it
substracts 7200 according to my CEST timezone...
--
        Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com>
                      http://www.kergis.com/
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89  250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C