Messages in this thread | | | From | OGAWA Hirofumi <> | Subject | Re: [fuse-devel] utimensat fails to update ctime | Date | Thu, 24 Dec 2009 04:23:28 +0900 |
| |
Eric Blake <ebb9@byu.net> writes:
> By the way, is there any reliable way, other than uname() and checking for > a minimum kernel version, to tell if all file systems will properly > support UTIME_OMIT?
Um... sorry, I don't know. And it might be hard to detect efficiently if the workaround is enough efficient like one fstat() syscall (Pass fd to kernel. I.e. just read from cached inode).
> For coreutils 8.3, we will be inserting a workaround where instead of > using UTIME_OMIT, we call fstatat() in advance of utimensat() and pass > the original timestamp down. But it would be nice to avoid the > penalty of the extra stat if there were a reliable way to ensure that, > regardless of file system, the use of UTIME_OMIT will be honored. > After all, coreutils wants touch(1) to work regardless of how old the > user's kernel and file system drivers are.
Or it would depend on coreutils policy though, personally I think it's ok that it ignores the bug as known fs bug, otherwise coreutils would need to collect workarounds on several filesystems of several OSes.
Thanks. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
| |