From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_QUAR,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from bobo.thehutt.org (cj205544-a.alex1.va.home.com [67.160.12.87]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with SMTP id D58171A663 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 11:46:58 -0600 (CST) Received: (qmail 99463 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 17:47:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.0.0.13) by 10.0.0.1 with QMQP; 13 Dec 2001 17:47:17 -0000 From: "Jerry A!" Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:47:11 -0500 To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] qmail and .keep files - admin consideration? Message-ID: <20011213124711.A9116@nomad.thehutt.org> References: <1008248051.1016.14.camel@willow.theleaf.office> <1237.63.204.248.196.1008265539.squirrel@www.portablehole.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1237.63.204.248.196.1008265539.squirrel@www.portablehole.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Organization: Broken Toys Unlimited Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Reply-To: jerry@thehutt.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developer discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 9ff9fd7d-aea0-4b26-883d-e48960c75482 X-Archives-Hash: eef08e1543509f208fb26161b5bb127b On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 09:45:39AM -0800, jano wrote: : : : I hope I got this right: the .keep files are there to prevent the qmail : queue directory from being clobbered during an unmerge, correct? My take on : this discussion will be obviously OT, so any response to this would best : come directly to me (unless deemed proper for gentoo-dev) Come to think of it, something isn't making sense to me. I thought that files and directories weren't unmerged if the mtimes were different from the ones recorded when the portage was installed. If that's the case then, empty or not, these directories shouldn't get deleted b/c they should all have been touched when the newer version of a portage is installed. Or am I missing something? --Jerry Open-Source software isn't a matter of life or death... ...It's much more important than that!