lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 02/18] xstat: Add a pair of system calls to make extended file stats available [ver #6]
    From
    Date
    On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 19:03 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
    > On Thursday 2010-07-22 18:40, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    >
    > >On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org> wrote:
    > >> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 08:47:46AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > >>> Tell me why we shouldn't just do this right?
    > >>
    > >> No, ctime isn't the same as Windows "create time".
    > >
    > >Umm. What kind of reading problems do you guys have?
    > >
    > >I know effin well that ctime isn't the same as Windows create time.
    > >THAT WAS MY POINT.
    > >
    > >But the fact is, th Unix ctime semantics are insane and largely
    > >useless. There's a damn good reason almost nobody uses ctime under
    > >unix.
    >
    > I beg to differ. ctime is not completely useless. It reflects changes on
    > the inode for when you don't you change the content. It's like an mtime
    > for the metadata. It comes useful when you go around in your filesystem
    > trying to figure out who of your co-admins screwed up the permissions on
    > /etc/passwd... and if the mtime is the same as that of the last backup,
    > I can at least have a reasonable assurance that it was /only/ the
    > metadata that was tampered with. (SHA1 check, yeah yeah, costly on large
    > files.)

    Errr... Only if you eliminate utimes() from your syscall table.
    Otherwise it is trivial to reset the mtime after changing the file
    contents.

    Cheers
    Trond



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-07-22 19:19    [W:0.047 / U:0.108 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site