[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification?
From: |
Axel Beckert |
Subject: |
Re: [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification? |
Date: |
Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:33:52 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 07:20:28PM +0200, Peter Schuller wrote:
> One problem with changing it *back* is that you inherently introduce a
> race condition with other processes. If we allow for applications
> depending on atime in non-obvious ways, the potential consequences of
> atime moving *backwards* as opposed to unnecessarily forward could
> potentially be worse.
Full Ack. Didn't think about that. But not modifying it from the
beginning solves the problem very elegant.
Regards, Axel
--
Axel Beckert - address@hidden, address@hidden - http://noone.org/abe/
- [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification?, Axel Beckert, 2007/06/12
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification?, mike, 2007/06/12
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification?, Axel Beckert, 2007/06/12
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification?, Peter Schuller, 2007/06/13
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification?,
Axel Beckert <=
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification?, Charles Duffy, 2007/06/15
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification?, Steven Willoughby, 2007/06/15
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification?, Steven Willoughby, 2007/06/15
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Preventing access time modification?, Charles Duffy, 2007/06/15