[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tla1.2 on cygwin
From: |
Robert Collins |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tla1.2 on cygwin |
Date: |
Mon, 15 Mar 2004 09:02:28 +1100 |
On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 05:05, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >> I'd rather assume that if ctime and size have not changed, then the file
> >> hasn't changed, even though it's possibly incorrect.
> > You meant mtime, right? :-)
>
> Actually no: I meant ctime.
> mtime can be tweaked with touch, so you can't rely on it if you want to
> be safe. But admittedly, CVS relies on exclusively on mtime (not even the
> size) and problems related to that have been extremely rare.
hardlinking updates ctime. ctime cannot be used.
> That can happen while keeping the inode constant as well.
not without deliberate intervention a la touch. We're not aiming to
prevent people shooting their own foot off. We're trying to provide
sights so that they know when they've pointed the gun at said foot.
> > All of the "changes" and "file diffs" will produce faulty output if the
> > basis for comparison is corrupt.
>
> Sure. Corruption can and does happen without changing any inode number,
> mtime, or size.
Oh? (Not disk random bits changing though - that disk sector checksums
are for).
Rob
--
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tla1.2 on cygwin, (continued)
RE: [Gnu-arch-users] tla1.2 on cygwin, Parker, Ron, 2004/03/09
RE: [Gnu-arch-users] tla1.2 on cygwin, Parker, Ron, 2004/03/09
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tla1.2 on cygwin, David A. Wheeler, 2004/03/10