File ctime/mtime update inconsistencies

[David Collier-Brown]

  From looking at an old truss, I suspect you want to update
the timestamp before you call close on the file.  Whether
that's entirely sufficient for Windows client foolishness
I can't say (but smbtorture will (;-))

--dave

Jeremy Allison wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:40:34PM +0300, Atte Peltomaki wrote:
> 
>>On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 01:16:51PM +0300, Atte Peltomaki wrote:
>>
>>>Problem: neither ctime nor mtime attributes are consistently updated
>>>when new files are created or existing ones replaced. 
>>
>>Another thing I would like to address is timestamps for large files. In
>>addition to consistently updating c/mtime, I think it would make sense
>>to update the stamp also *after* file transfer has completed. This would
>>allow eg. rsync to identify changed files without expensive
>>checksumming. 
>>
>>Would these changes be accepted in mainstream, if I send patches?
>>(Against 3.2).
> 
> 
> Timestamps are a very tricky problem. Any patches sent would
> have to pass the Samba4 smbtorture tests. This is not as easy
> as it sounds :-). But yes, I'm willing to look at any patches
> submitted.
> 
> Jeremy.
> 

-- 
David Collier-Brown            | Always do right. This will gratify
Sun Microsystems, Toronto      | some people and astonish the rest
davecb at sun.com                 |                      -- Mark Twain
(905) 943-1983, cell: (647) 833-9377, (800) 555-9786 x56583
bridge: (877) 385-4099 code: 506 9191#