On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 07:26:37PM +0700, Max Nikulin wrote: > On 21/12/2023 21:53, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 09:08:09AM -0500, Dan Ritter wrote: > > > > > > And > > > it is quite possible on a few of those machines to have multiple > > > desktop users, each from a different TZ. > > > > I've sometimes the impression that desktop environments are losing > > the concept pf multi-user operating systems and are regreding to > > something like Windows 95. > > Tomas, I do not see you point and I feel like my messages may cause some > sort of confusion.
I'm easily confused, that happens. So thanks for your patience :-) In any case, no offense intended, and much less to you. > POSIX and libc have some shortcomings, but they are not unique to desktop > environments and applicable to window manager sessions and even to > standalone applications. I know. > /etc/localtime is a global setting. Its change may affect all users not > having explicit TZ. Something better than libc is required for an > application (especially multithread one) that need to deal with time in > multiple time zones. Yes. Libc's (POSIX, for that) interface is pretty bad. It effectively limits one to one time zone per libc instance. > Systemd, from my point of view, does not make it worse. It just allows e.g. > firefox to subscribe to timezone change events instead of adding explicit > support of /etc/localtime and inotify handlers. I think it's more a perception thing. People are tempted to believe "the operating system has a timezone", whereas /etc/timezone [1] is just the global default for the (libc) applications to fall back to whenever they don't have specified one. > I am in doubts if Linux ever was more "multiuser" in respect to timezones. It is definitely more multiuser than the Windows95 it is trying to emulate these days (yes, a bit of hyperbole, but hey). Cheers [1] Or whatever that thing may be called in systemd-land. > >
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
