Because Time and Dates can be a real pain I often use the following resourc=
e:

The Best of Dates, The Worst Of Dates:    (by Gilbert Healton)
http://www.exit109.com/~ghealton/y2k/yrexamples.html

The Best of Dates, The Worst Of Dates: Leap Seconds and UTC
http://www.exit109.com/~ghealton/y2k/yrexamples.html#_History.Leap

NIST Time Scale Data Archive
http://tf.nist.gov/pubs/bulletin/leapsecond.htm

No mention of a 61st second (two positive leap seconds) anywhere...
If nobody can come up with a reason it should be patched.

Regards,
Onno


On 9/9/05, Johan Danielsson <joda@pdc.kth.se> wrote:
> "Stefan 'Kaishakunin' Schumacher" <stefan@net-tex.de> writes:
>=20
> > Why   is the 61st second required? As far as I unterstood, only a
> > 60th second is required for an additional leap second.
>=20
> Good question. I was under the impression that there could be up to
> two leap-seconds in one go, but looking for it I can't find any proof
> for this. There has not been more than one at a time since 1972, when
> the definition of UTC was altered (before, it was stepped by smaller
> amounts).
>=20
> /Johan
>