amos@taux02.UUCP (Amos Shapir) (08/07/88)
There were many replies to the original article - except that none of the posters seem to have really read it. The guy did not ask whether a renamed file's ctime should changed, but rather, why did rename change it when both files were identical, and therefore no change was actually done! -- Amos Shapir amos@nsc.com National Semiconductor (Israel) 6 Maskit st. P.O.B. 3007, Herzlia 46104, Israel Tel. +972 52 522261 34 48 E / 32 10 N (My other cpu is a NS32532)
chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) (08/08/88)
In article <37@taux02.UUCP> amos@taux02.UUCP (Amos Shapir) writes: >There were many replies to the original article - except that none of the >posters seem to have really read it. The guy did not ask whether a renamed >file's ctime should changed, but rather, why did rename change it when >both files were identical, and therefore no change was actually done! I answered that in my first followup. I think I even put it in the `summary' line: crash recovery. (Basically, if you crash in the middle of a rename, the link count has to have been bumped. As a side effect, another part of the kernel updates the ctime. It would not be unfeasible to reset the ctime after the rename completes, but it *would* require changes outside the ufs code.) -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163) Domain: chris@mimsy.umd.edu Path: uunet!mimsy!chris