Re: [Bug-gnulib] utime.c patch for the !HAVE_UTIMES_NULL case

[Jim Meyering]

James Youngman <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 08:31:28PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
>
>> I found a reference to Sequent Dynix (maybe 4.x?), which
>> I think was based on BSD 4.2.
>>
>> Fri 18 Oct 1991 23:29:24  Jim Meyering  (meyering at wombat)
>>
>>         * configure: fixed test to detect sequent's strange interpretation
>>         of utime(file, NULL).
>>
>> As far as I know Dynix isn't in use anymore.
>
> It's still in use.  I even still have access to such a machine.
> Naturally I use GNU tools on it because the native ones are
> uninspiring.  It wouldn't bother me personally if GNU dropped support
> for Dynix, however.

Thanks for pointing that out.
If they do the right thing now for `utime (file, NULL)'
then we don't need to worry about it.

Would you please see what you get in config.cache
if you run ./configure --cache=config.cache for e.g., any
coreutils or fileutils release?

If it contains this line,

  ac_cv_func_utime_null=${ac_cv_func_utime_null=yes}

then it might be safe finally to remove the old work-around code.