Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #93881 > unrolled thread

The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  The Leap Second is Dead.  How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 15:45 +0000
    Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-16 16:56 +0100
      Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 17:08 +0000
    Re: The Leap Second is Dead.  How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Cóilín Nioclásín Glostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-10-16 19:13 +0000
    Re: The Leap Second is Dead.  How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 13:29 +0000
      Re: The Leap Second is Dead.  How Will GNU/Linux Cope? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-17 13:51 +0000
      Re: The Leap Second is Dead.  How Will GNU/Linux Cope? Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 14:19 +0000
        Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 19:37 +0200
          Re: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:25 +0100
          Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-18 11:57 +0000
            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:20 +0200
              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:25 +0100
                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:31 +0200
                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:23 +0100
                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 13:35 +0000
                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 18:45 +0000
                      Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:41 +0000
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-19 00:57 +0000
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-19 09:26 +0100
                            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-19 14:17 +0000
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:11 +0000
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:38 +0000
                            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 03:52 +0000
                              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-19 03:56 +0000
                                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 05:58 +0000
                                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:41 +0100
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-19 03:03 +0000
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:49 +0000
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:49 +0100
                      Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:29 +0100
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 01:59 +0000
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-20 13:20 +0000
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:29 +0100
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 18:10 +0000
                            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:19 +0100
                              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:22 +0000
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 18:05 +0000
                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:15 +0100
                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-19 00:44 -0400
                      Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:54 +0100
                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 20:27 +0200
                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:38 +0200
                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:26 +0100
                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 18:59 +0000
                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 20:36 +0200
                      Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 09:08 +0100
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:35 +0200
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:21 +0100
                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 18:55 +0000
              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2026-10-18 19:05 +0000
                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:41 +0100
                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2026-10-19 00:15 +0000
                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:02 +0000
                      Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:18 +0100
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 01:52 +0000
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:37 +0200
                            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:39 +0100
                            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:22 +0100
                              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:11 +0200
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 17:45 +0000
                            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 18:28 +0000
                              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:05 +0000
                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:48 +0100
                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:42 +0000
                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:20 +0100
                      Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-10-20 08:39 +0200
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 07:53 +0000
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:38 +0200
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:23 +0100
                            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:13 +0200
                              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 23:18 +0000
                                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:09 +0200
                                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:22 +0000
                                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 11:19 +0200
                                      Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 13:44 +0000
                                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-21 13:54 +0000
                                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-21 15:33 +0100
                                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 15:19 +0100
                                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:44 +0000
                                            Re: names of bats "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:04 +0200
                                              Re: names of bats Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-10-22 11:15 +0100
                                                Re: names of bats "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:20 +0200
                                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:24 +0100
                                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:16 +0200
                                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:31 +0000
                                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:22 +0000
                                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 11:21 +0200
                                    Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 14:00 +0000
                                      Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 19:56 +0200
                        Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 19:04 +0000
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 22:02 +0200
                            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:22 +0100
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 20:29 +0000
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:12 +0000
                            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:22 +0100
                              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 13:57 +0000
                                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 15:18 +0100
                                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:51 +0000
                                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-21 19:58 +0200
                                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:58 +0000
                                    Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:19 +0200
                                      Re: Margarine c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-22 07:16 -0400
                                        Re: Margarine "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 13:46 +0200
                                          Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:54 +0100
                                          Re: Margarine rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:46 +0000
                                            Re: Margarine Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-22 19:05 +0000
                                        Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:46 +0100
                                      Re: Margarine The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:40 +0100
                          Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:20 +0100
                      Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 17:57 +0000
                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 20:49 +0200
            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:21 +0100
              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:04 +0000
            Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-18 14:07 +0000
              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-10-18 11:45 -0700
                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-18 19:27 +0000
                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:30 +0000
                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:06 +0000
              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:05 +0000
                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-18 19:32 +0000
                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-18 19:37 +0000
                  Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:20 +0000
                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:40 +0100
              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 21:00 +0200
              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 03:03 +0100
              Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:40 +0100
                Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:26 +0100

Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7  Next page →

#94534 — Margarine

On 2026-10-21 21:58, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 19:58:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>> Here butter used to came wrapped with metallised paper, and margarine in
>> plastic containers. And it was yellow.
> 
> https://www.newyorkalmanack.com/2022/04/crimes-against-butter-the-
> oleomargarine-controversy/
> 
> According to that they could sell colorized margarine after 1953. My
> mother always baked butter cookies for Christmas and I can remember her
> kneading the dye in. She swore she would never do such a thing but she
> also said she never smoked. She had a very selective memory.
> 
> Also, never assume a little kid isn't taking notes.

So, margarine in the XIX? I had no idea is was that old. I only knew the 
recent version of around 1975, maybe later. It was sold as healthier, 
made from vegetable oil.

I see in the wikipedia that they have evolved this century, but the 
issue is so controversial that there is no reliable info. They try to 
make a product that generates less cholesterol in blood, I guess.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94539 — Re: Margarine

On 10/22/26 06:19, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-10-21 21:58, rbowman wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 19:58:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>>> Here butter used to came wrapped with metallised paper, and margarine in
>>> plastic containers. And it was yellow.
>>
>> https://www.newyorkalmanack.com/2022/04/crimes-against-butter-the-
>> oleomargarine-controversy/
>>
>> According to that they could sell colorized margarine after 1953. My
>> mother always baked butter cookies for Christmas and I can remember her
>> kneading the dye in. She swore she would never do such a thing but she
>> also said she never smoked. She had a very selective memory.
>>
>> Also, never assume a little kid isn't taking notes.
> 
> So, margarine in the XIX? I had no idea is was that old. I only knew the 
> recent version of around 1975, maybe later. It was sold as healthier, 
> made from vegetable oil.
> 
> I see in the wikipedia that they have evolved this century, but the 
> issue is so controversial that there is no reliable info. They try to 
> make a product that generates less cholesterol in blood, I guess.

   My mother remembered USA margarine coming with the
   little yellow dye thing during WW2. UK and nearby,
   probably well after the war.

   Healthier ? No, not really. It remained popular
   because it was usually easier to spread, cheaper
   and had a longer shelf-life than real butter.

   Oh, NOW we know, dairy fats really are not bad
   for you. The margarine made of mystery oils is
   more suspect.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94544 — Re: Margarine

On 2026-10-22 13:16, c186282 wrote:
> On 10/22/26 06:19, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2026-10-21 21:58, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 19:58:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here butter used to came wrapped with metallised paper, and 
>>>> margarine in
>>>> plastic containers. And it was yellow.
>>>
>>> https://www.newyorkalmanack.com/2022/04/crimes-against-butter-the-
>>> oleomargarine-controversy/
>>>
>>> According to that they could sell colorized margarine after 1953. My
>>> mother always baked butter cookies for Christmas and I can remember her
>>> kneading the dye in. She swore she would never do such a thing but she
>>> also said she never smoked. She had a very selective memory.
>>>
>>> Also, never assume a little kid isn't taking notes.
>>
>> So, margarine in the XIX? I had no idea is was that old. I only knew 
>> the recent version of around 1975, maybe later. It was sold as 
>> healthier, made from vegetable oil.
>>
>> I see in the wikipedia that they have evolved this century, but the 
>> issue is so controversial that there is no reliable info. They try to 
>> make a product that generates less cholesterol in blood, I guess.
> 
>    My mother remembered USA margarine coming with the
>    little yellow dye thing during WW2. UK and nearby,
>    probably well after the war.
> 
>    Healthier ? No, not really. It remained popular
>    because it was usually easier to spread, cheaper
>    and had a longer shelf-life than real butter.

I remember the commercials here saying that it was healthier (as in less 
cholesterol, or you got less fat). Might have been 1980. Possibly 
cheaper, but I know my mother started to buy it because of the healthier 
aspect.

> 
>    Oh, NOW we know, dairy fats really are not bad
>    for you. The margarine made of mystery oils is
>    more suspect.

Mystery oils? No, here they have to list them exactly.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94551 — Re: Margarine

On 22/10/2026 12:46, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-10-22 13:16, c186282 wrote:
>> On 10/22/26 06:19, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2026-10-21 21:58, rbowman wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 19:58:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Here butter used to came wrapped with metallised paper, and 
>>>>> margarine in
>>>>> plastic containers. And it was yellow.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.newyorkalmanack.com/2022/04/crimes-against-butter-the-
>>>> oleomargarine-controversy/
>>>>
>>>> According to that they could sell colorized margarine after 1953. My
>>>> mother always baked butter cookies for Christmas and I can remember her
>>>> kneading the dye in. She swore she would never do such a thing but she
>>>> also said she never smoked. She had a very selective memory.
>>>>
>>>> Also, never assume a little kid isn't taking notes.
>>>
>>> So, margarine in the XIX? I had no idea is was that old. I only knew 
>>> the recent version of around 1975, maybe later. It was sold as 
>>> healthier, made from vegetable oil.
>>>
>>> I see in the wikipedia that they have evolved this century, but the 
>>> issue is so controversial that there is no reliable info. They try to 
>>> make a product that generates less cholesterol in blood, I guess.
>>
>>    My mother remembered USA margarine coming with the
>>    little yellow dye thing during WW2. UK and nearby,
>>    probably well after the war.
>>
>>    Healthier ? No, not really. It remained popular
>>    because it was usually easier to spread, cheaper
>>    and had a longer shelf-life than real butter.
> 
> I remember the commercials here saying that it was healthier (as in less 
> cholesterol, or you got less fat). Might have been 1980. Possibly 
> cheaper, but I know my mother started to buy it because of the healthier 
> aspect.
> 
The health advice is a lot more nuanced these days

Trans fats - heavily processed oils made to be solid as in cheap 
margarine and many biscuit and pastry products are extremely bad.

Meat fat, dairy fats coconut oil  are saturated fats and are needful bit 
not to be eaten in quantity


Unsaturated  fats like most pure vegetable oils is allegedly the best

HOWEVER there is a linkage called 'metabolic syndrome'  which links high 
blood lipid levels, impaired insulin response (Type II diabetes), 
obesity  and higher  risk of blocked arteries all to intake of excess 
carbohydrates.

It is known that eating fat reduces hunger and helps avoid overeating of 
starches and sugars

>>
>>    Oh, NOW we know, dairy fats really are not bad
>>    for you. The margarine made of mystery oils is
>>    more suspect.
> 
> Mystery oils? No, here they have to list them exactly.
> 
It is less what they are than how they are processed.


> 

-- 
There’s a mighty big difference between good, sound reasons and reasons 
that sound good.

Burton Hillis (William Vaughn, American columnist)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94567 — Re: Margarine

On Thu, 22 Oct 2026 13:46:45 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> I remember the commercials here saying that it was healthier (as in less
> cholesterol, or you got less fat). Might have been 1980. Possibly
> cheaper,
> but I know my mother started to buy it because of the healthier aspect.

In the early '50s my mother bought it for the Christmas cookies because it 
was cheaper. That was why she was so adamant she never used it. The 
cookies were meant to be brought to various holiday parties. Housewives of 
the time that found one of their own using inferior products made a shark 
tank look inviting. 

Decades ago I used Canola, a trademark of a Canadian cultivar that became 
a generic term. It was a more marketable name than rapeseed oil. Then one 
day I noticed it smelled a lot like the boiled linseed oil I used to 
finish dulcimers. I switched to olive oil. 

At my last physical my HDL level was high enough that it slightly offset 
other risk factors. My diet would not be approved by a cardiologist but it 
seems to be working for me. Like lactose tolerance I have the feeling my 
ancestors were People Eating Tasty Animals rather than plant munchers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94584 — Re: Margarine

On 2026-10-22, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> Decades ago I used Canola, a trademark of a Canadian cultivar that became 
> a generic term. It was a more marketable name than rapeseed oil. Then one 
> day I noticed it smelled a lot like the boiled linseed oil I used to 
> finish dulcimers. I switched to olive oil. 

We use canola oil if we want a lighter oil that can withstand
high temperatures.  Otherwise our go-to is olive oil.

I always wondered about that term "extra virgin olive oil"
(or EVOO, thank you Rachael Ray).  Just how virgin can you get?
Do extra-virgins only get a little bit pregnant?

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  In this world there are
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  two kinds of people:
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  1. Those who can extrapolate
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  from incomplete data.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94550 — Re: Margarine

On 22/10/2026 12:16, c186282 wrote:
> Oh, NOW we know, dairy fats really are not bad
>    for you. The margarine made of mystery oils is
>    more suspect.
  ^^^^ +100


-- 
    "Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have 
forgotten your aim."

  George Santayana

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94549 — Re: Margarine

On 22/10/2026 11:19, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-10-21 21:58, rbowman wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 19:58:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>>> Here butter used to came wrapped with metallised paper, and margarine in
>>> plastic containers. And it was yellow.
>>
>> https://www.newyorkalmanack.com/2022/04/crimes-against-butter-the-
>> oleomargarine-controversy/
>>
>> According to that they could sell colorized margarine after 1953. My
>> mother always baked butter cookies for Christmas and I can remember her
>> kneading the dye in. She swore she would never do such a thing but she
>> also said she never smoked. She had a very selective memory.
>>
>> Also, never assume a little kid isn't taking notes.
> 
> So, margarine in the XIX? I had no idea is was that old. I only knew the 
> recent version of around 1975, maybe later. It was sold as healthier, 
> made from vegetable oil.
> 
> I see in the wikipedia that they have evolved this century, but the 
> issue is so controversial that there is no reliable info. They try to 
> make a product that generates less cholesterol in blood, I guess.
> 
Well originally it was to cope with less availability of dairy product.
The BS about it lowering cholesterol has been completely debunked over 
the last decade.

You neither get fat, not high lipids in the blood from eating fats.
It is pretty much a starch and sugar that does that.
And many priocesses oils are in fact quite bad for you health - most 
vegetable oils in fact

'Lo -fat' foods are usually crammed with sugar and are far worse than 
the full fat versions


-- 
Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94462 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial

On 20/10/2026 20:04, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2026-10-20, Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> wrote:
> 
>> Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Do people in the USA use another numbering for CR2032 batteries? Or do
>>> they just use the SI units there?
>>
>> 3,5 Inch Floppies are actually specced as 89 mm. In the 1990ies some
>> german courts fined companied for not giving the floppy size in SI
>> units, which prompty led to advertisements like "Diskette 8,89 cm".
> 
> What amuses me is when I go to the grocery store for some butter
> and it's marked "454 g".  So how metric are we, really?
> 
> Give a man 25.4 mm, and he'll take 1.609 km.
> 
Theres always a man with a low coefficient of reflectivity in the wood pile

-- 
“Some people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of 
a car with the cramped public exposure of 
an airplane.”

Dennis Miller

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94410 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial

On Tue, 20 Oct 2026 02:20:22 +0100, Nuno Silva wrote:

> Do people in the USA use another numbering for CR2032 batteries? Or do
> they just use the SI units there?

Most know what is stamped on the battery and don't really think about it 
being dimensions. It's haphazard. I'm looking at a sports drink bottle 
that is labeled 20 Fl Oz (59 ml).  In other cases the label may lead with 
750 lm (25.4 Fl Oz).

The whisky bottlers were one of the first to go to SI units. A fifth of 
booze was a 1/5 of a US gallon or 757 ml. The new fifth is 750 ml. What 
difference does 7 ml make? Well, if you're bottling 100,000 units...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94352 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?)

On 2026-10-18 21:05, Roger Blake wrote:
> On 2026-10-18, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> Here, the imperial system is not even mentioned in school. All is SI. As
>> in most countries.
> 
> How are vehicles wheel/tire diameters in your country measured?
> All the imported cars I see here in the U.S. have wheels and
> tire size measured in inches.

I don't know. I just ask my mechanic for a new set of wheels, in the 
acceptable set listed by the manufacturer :-D


Google says:

Car wheels are measured using specific dimensions and a mix of inches 
and millimeters, according to Wikipedia.

Main Measurements and Units

• Diameter (Rim Size): Measured in inches. This is the distance across 
the wheel taken from the inside bead seat (where the tire mounts) rather 
than the very outer edge of the lip.

• Width: Measured in inches. This is the distance between the inner bead 
seat and the outer bead seat of the rim.

• Offset (ET): Measured in millimeters (mm). This is the distance from 
the wheel's centerline to the surface that bolts against the car hub. It 
can be positive, negative, or zero.

• PCD (Pitch Circle Diameter / Bolt Pattern): Expressed as the number of 
bolt holes and the diameter of an imaginary circle passing through their 
centers, measured in millimeters (mm) (e.g., 5x114.3).

• Center Bore: Measured in millimeters (mm). This is the diameter of the 
large hole right in the center of the wheel that fits over the vehicle's 
hub.

If you are looking up a specific wheel or tire size, let me know the 
year, make, and model of your car and I can help you find the stock 
dimensions.


And the tires?

Car tires (the rubber part) are measured using a mix of three different 
metric and imperial units. If you look at the sidewall of a tire, you 
will see a standardized code like 205/55R16, which breaks down as follows:

1. Section Width (Millimeters)

The first number indicates the width of the tire from sidewall to 
sidewall in millimeters (mm). For example, a 205 tire is 205 millimeters 
wide at its widest point.

2. Aspect Ratio (Percentage)

The second number is a percentage representing the profile or height of 
the sidewall relative to the tire's width. In a 55 tire, the sidewall 
height is 55% of its 205mm width (which equals about 112.75 mm). Lower 
percentages mean a low-profile tire with a thinner rubber edge.

3. Wheel Diameter (Inches)

The final number tells you the size of the wheel the tire is designed to 
fit, measured in inches. An R16 tire is designed for a 16-inch wheel 
(the "R" stands for radial construction).

Complete Tire Specification Example: 205/55R16 91V


Component	Meaning	Unit / Type
205	Section Width	Millimeters (mm)
55	Aspect Ratio	Percentage (%)
R	Construction Type	Radial
16	Wheel Diameter	Inches (")
91	Load Index	Numeric Code (e.g., 91 = 615 kg)
V	Speed Rating	Letter Code (e.g., V = up to 240 km/h)




In primary school or high school, I never did calculations using inches 
or miles or pounds, we only used the SI. There were lessons on the 
equivalences, taught as a curiosity, not as a real thing. And how to 
convert units.

In engineering schools, we used the SI. I also studied in a Canadian 
college, I felt home there. No inches.

Of course, some engineers have to deal with things such as different 
threads. Marines use the nautical miles, aviators use feet for altitude.




-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94169 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?)

On 18/10/2026 12:57, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> Believe it or not, this (the age-old discussion of US/Imperial vs. metric)
> actually seems to be another instance of "Yes, it is technically superior,
> but it is not the standard (i.e., what most people use), so we think you
> should go with the standard even though it is technically inferior."
> 
I fail to see anything superior about either system, frankly

And I have used both nearly all my life.

You don't get far as an engineer without being able to convert standards 
rapidly and fluently in your head. Or on a calculator

The arguments are mostly people talking bollocks about stuff they have 
no understanding of, so they substitute violently defended opinions


> There are actually quite a lot of those in life.
> 
> I.e., what I'm saying is that there actually are quite a few arguments to
> be made that US/Imperial is actually better.
> 
*shrug* duodecimal versus decimal. sexadecimal even better 360 dyas in a 
year, almost. Good enough for religion

> Sort of like Betamax (Yes, the classic example of "better does not ensure
> market dominance".)

Again *shrug*. Plywood is sold as 2.4384 metres long, instead of 8 feet. 
Its the same bloody sized wood

It is a complete storm in a bigots teacup.

Any US garage will be using metric and imperial all the time.

Any pilot will be too.


-- 
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the 
urge to rule it.”
– H. L. Mencken

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94212 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?)

On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 13:21:53 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> I fail to see anything superior about either system, frankly

When you are under the car it's much easier to say 'Darling, can you give 
me the 20'  than ask for a 13/16". 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94198 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?)

On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 11:57:54 -0000 (UTC), Kenny McCormack wrote:

> 
> I.e., what I'm saying is that there actually are quite a few arguments to
> be made that US/Imperial is actually better.
> 

The metric system was imposed, i.e. forced, whereas the Imperial units are
traditional and hence far more natural.

Forcing an entire society to change is never a good idea.  To force SI units
in the laboratory, among professional scientists, may be an easy switch, but
to expect the general, unwashed, population to immediately embrace a new system
of units is folly.

Keep SI in the lab and let the common folk do as they always have done.

Then there is the issue of manufacturing.  Converting a large industrial base,
such as in the US, willy-nilly to SI units is a very expensive undertaking.

For example, virtually all lumber products in the US are cut to Imperial
dimensions.  The ubiquitous "stud," which is universal in construction, is
still the "2 by 4" being 2 inches by 4 inches by 8 feet.  I highly doubt
that any lumber product is cut to SI dimensions.  The saw mills are too old
to easily change, and the wood worker is too conditioned to think differently.

Also, most raw materials such as pipes, tubing, and other parts are still
produced in Imperial units because most everything classified as buildings
or infrastructure was built according to Imperial specs. 

It will be a LONG, LONG TIME before US society becomes exclusively metric.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94208 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?)

On 10/18/2026 07:07, Leroy H wrote:
>[...]

> Then there is the issue of manufacturing.  Converting a large industrial base,
> such as in the US, willy-nilly to SI units is a very expensive undertaking.

On the other hand, NOT joining the world standards has its own cost.

Back in the 1980s, at a PPOE, we licensed a design for an electronic 
device. Having been designed in Scotland, of course all mechanical 
dimensions were given in millimeters. An older manufacturing manager 
wanted it "Americanized" and directed a summer intern to convert all 
dimensions to "traditional" measures. The kid got out a calculator and 
converted all measurements to inches with 3 decimals. When they took it 
to the metal shop, the shop foreman asked if they really needed the 
dimensions exact to 0.001" ? No, of course not, that would be way too 
expensive. So the old guy replaced all the measurements to fractional 
inches instead.

The resulting product never worked right, but had bad fits between the 
PCBs and the card cage, betwwen the chassis frame and the side, top and 
bottom panels, and felt warped when customers tried to mount it in a rack.

Of course, it was all stupid. The machine shop where they built it had 
mostly Japanese machinery, which could do inces or millimeters at the 
flick of a switch.
> For example, virtually all lumber products in the US are cut to Imperial
> dimensions.  The ubiquitous "stud," which is universal in construction, is
> still the "2 by 4" being 2 inches by 4 inches by 8 feet.  I highly doubt
> that any lumber product is cut to SI dimensions.  The saw mills are too old
> to easily change, and the wood worker is too conditioned to think differently.

Your example is a little odd, because a "2 by 4" is NOT 2 inches by 4 
inches and has not been for decades.

A standard 2x4 lumber has actual dimensions of 1.5 inches thick by 3.5 
inches wide (38 mm × 89 mm).

This principle applies to other dimensional lumber as well, such as 2x6, 
2x8, and 4x4, where the actual dimensions are slightly smaller than the 
nominal size to account for finishing processes.

> Also, most raw materials such as pipes, tubing, and other parts are still
> produced in Imperial units because most everything classified as buildings
> or infrastructure was built according to Imperial specs.
> 
> It will be a LONG, LONG TIME before US society becomes exclusively metric.
Jimmy Carter started, but Reagan reversed the process.
-- 
Lars Poulsen - an old geek in Santa Barbara, California

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94220 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?)

On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 11:45:50 -0700, Lars Poulsen wrote:

> 
> Your example is a little odd, because a "2 by 4" is NOT 2 inches by 4 
> inches and has not been for decades.
> 
> A standard 2x4 lumber has actual dimensions of 1.5 inches thick by 3.5 
> inches wide (38 mm × 89 mm).
> 

The cutting dimensions at the saw mill are 2" X 4".  After cutting,
however, the lumber is dried in kilns which shrinks the dimensions.

But the size of the lumber throughout the distribution chain is
always based on the original saw mill cutting dimensions.

One never walks into a lumber yard and asks for a "1.5 X 3.5."
It is always "2 X 4."

The same applies to all other lumber products.  It is a peculiar
system but one gets used to it.


>> 
>> It will be a LONG, LONG TIME before US society becomes exclusively metric.
>
> Jimmy Carter started, but Reagan reversed the process.
>

What I find somewhat amusing is that, like most other DIY
people, I was forced to purchase a set of metric sockets
(at great expense).

Each socket is forged on one end to be a specific metric
size (e.g. 10mm) but the reverse end, where the shaft of
the socket wrench attaches, is forged to an Imperial unit
(e.g. 1/4 inch or 1/2 inch). 

The tools are actually a hybrid.

If a society is forced to go metric it should go metric
all the way.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94272 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?)

On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 19:27:52 +0000, Leroy H wrote:

> What I find somewhat amusing is that, like most other DIY people, I was
> forced to purchase a set of metric sockets (at great expense).
> 
> Each socket is forged on one end to be a specific metric size (e.g.
> 10mm)
> but the reverse end, where the shaft of the socket wrench attaches, is
> forged to an Imperial unit (e.g. 1/4 inch or 1/2 inch).

I've got a couple of sets of metric sockets but I don't recall either 
being at great expense.

What I find annoying is the number of metric and SAE sockets that are 
almost but not quite the same dimension. That's a real joy when you're 
working on a US vehicle that mixed and matched.

Then there was Harley when they went to Torx fasteners. Most of the early 
Torx sets went T20, T25, T30 etc. Harley threw a few T27s in at odd 
places. A T25 almost works before it strips out the head.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94265 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second ...)

On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 11:45:50 -0700, Lars Poulsen wrote:

> On the other hand, NOT joining the world standards has its own cost.

One odd thing is, most of the countries in the world use Imperial
units for air traffic control. That is, heights are given in feet,
even across Europe and other metric-using countries. (Not sure about
speeds.)

That is, with two exceptions: Russia and China. Fly over those
countries, and they give heights in metres.

Do you think this causes confusion, and possible risk of getting
things wrong? I don’t think so. The safety margins are routinely on
the order of distances measured in large fractions of kilometres (or
miles, if you prefer). So a rounding error here or there won’t really
make much difference.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94214 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?)

On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 14:07:31 +0000, Leroy H wrote:

> For example, virtually all lumber products in the US are cut to Imperial
> dimensions.  The ubiquitous "stud," which is universal in construction,
> is still the "2 by 4" being 2 inches by 4 inches by 8 feet.  I highly
> doubt that any lumber product is cut to SI dimensions.  The saw mills
> are too old to easily change, and the wood worker is too conditioned to
> think differently.

Obviously you haven't bought a 2 by 4 lately.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94223 — Re: Metric vs. US/Imperial (Was: The Leap Second is Dead. How Will GNU/Linux Cope?)

On 18 Oct 2026 19:05:48 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> 
> Obviously you haven't bought a 2 by 4 lately.
>

That's all one *can* buy.

Trying walking into a lumber yard and asking for
a 1.5 x 3.5.  The sales clerks will call 9-1-1.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web