lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] lutimesat: actual syscall and wire-up on i386
    Andrew Morton wrote:
    > OK, but I don't recall having seeing a demand for lutimes(). Opinions
    > are sought?

    It's an interface which has been available on other platforms forever
    (lutimes, not lutimesat). If it can be implemented correctly on the
    interesting file systems I'd say "go ahead", it can only be useful and
    have more benefits than the probably small cost of implementing it.

    If on the other hand important filesystems cannot support lutimes then
    I'd wait with introducing the syscall at least until the support is
    added. It much easier to cope with unavailable syscalls then it is with
    partially working ones.

    --
    ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖

    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-01-26 21:49    [W:2.984 / U:0.392 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site