[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#837797: tzdata: America/Eastern reports Local Mean Time by default instead of EST



Package: tzdata
Version: 2016f-1
Severity: critical
Tags: newcomer
Justification: breaks unrelated software

Dear Maintainer,

   * What led up to the situation?
        Running unit tests in Python while set timezone using the string
'America/Eastern'.
        The offset was reported as UTC-4.93333333333333333333 which resulted in
a discrepency of about 4 minutes
        When running the same test on a server running Debian 8.5 with tzdata
2016f-0+deb8u1 the same test passed
   * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)?
        Changing timezone to 'EST' fixed the particular test and gave the
expected -5 offset for Standard time, but I think EST and America/Eastern
should be returning the same value
   * What was the outcome of this action?
        I was sad
   * What outcome did you expect instead?
        -5 offset instead of -4.9333...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_mean_time

Here's a gist with an example:
https://gist.github.com/gregflynn/2ac90ee0c39568f2e45f33ade476df51



-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.6.4-saddle (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

Versions of packages tzdata depends on:
ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]  1.5.59

tzdata recommends no packages.

tzdata suggests no packages.

-- debconf information:
  tzdata/Zones/Antarctica:
  tzdata/Zones/Europe:
  tzdata/Zones/Australia:
* tzdata/Zones/America: New_York
  tzdata/Zones/Atlantic:
* tzdata/Zones/Etc: UTC
  tzdata/Zones/Pacific:
  tzdata/Zones/Africa:
  tzdata/Zones/Asia:
  tzdata/Zones/Arctic:
  tzdata/Zones/Indian:
* tzdata/Areas: America
  tzdata/Zones/US:
  tzdata/Zones/SystemV:


Reply to: