From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NDX0s-0003OR-Tw for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:35:31 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1DC74E096A; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:35:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAAB2E096A for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:35:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9661B67CD5 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:35:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.552 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.552 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.047, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZHDwezx-bpCG for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:35:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D61F167C7F for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:35:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1NDX0S-0006JG-I0 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 06:35:04 +0100 Received: from ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.21.207]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 06:35:04 +0100 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 06:35:04 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: mtime preservation Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:33:17 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20091120001820.7274bdf7@snowmobile> <4B07362D.2010108@gentoo.org> <7c612fc60911231049n4a51ddb0u30ae72d8ed93cdec@mail.gmail.com> <7c612fc60911251313i705a182as6cf50402c7829beb@mail.gmail.com> <20091125212718.5deb42f8@snowcone> <20091125221327.324e11fb@snowcone> <19213.46817.620937.656202@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20091126001540.08a6e193@snowmobile> <4B0DD08D.8040505@gentoo.org> <20091126011427.GD23443@hrair> <4B0E11A3.5020506@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 93a2e76e-fb36-4400-9ce9-93199d205b3d X-Archives-Hash: f5ebf5e34f759d0a440ae0f3b65f10b8 Zac Medico posted on Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:26:59 -0800 as excerpted: > Brian Harring wrote: >> This discussion in generall is daft. No package can rely on >> nanonsecond resolution for installation because the most common FS out >> there (ext3) does *second* level resolution only. As such, I can >> pretty much gurantee there is *zero* packages out there that require >> nanosecond resolution for installation. >=20 > Your "guarantee" is filesystem-specific. However, if we can establish > that all known packages with timestamp preservation requirements do > their timestamp comparisons with 1-second granularity, then we'll have = a > much safer (filesystem-independent) assumption. Thanks. That's basically what I'm wondering also, well, if they do it=20 with one second granularity, or if it's possible to make them do it that=20 with with a simple command-line sed, adding an option, but here it's=20 stated in different (fewer) words. --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman