Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/04/03/16:43:44
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Apr 3 15:54, Josef Drexler wrote:
>
>>Eric Blake wrote:
>>
>>>The bug is not that ctime was touched, but that mtime was not
>>>touched. Normally, Windows updates mtime automatically if you edit a
>>>file, only the ctime needed special treatment from cygwin. I have no
>>>idea why Win98 is not touching the mtime on appending or truncation.
>>
>>Oh, I have no problem with ctime changing, but mtime not changing is
>>definitely a bug in cygwin. It must somehow intentionally copy the old
>>mtime when a file is modified. If I repeat the sequence I posted using
>
>
> It's not exactly Cygwin, it's the incredible braindead Windows 95/98/Me
> and I'm more and more wondering why anybody is still using it voluntarily.
In my case the reason is that the programs I have don't and can't be
made to run on NT/2K/XP.
> No offence meant, I'm just venting.
>
> Cygwin is touching ctime right before closing the file, when a write or
> one of chmod/chown/acl has been called successfully.
>
> Win98 is apparently "confused" by the fact that ctime is changed to a value
> bigger than the modification time and then simply refuses to change the
> modification time on file close. I first thought this might be a FAT
> problem, but NT changes the modification time just fine. I can't stop
> shaking my head about 9x.
So, is that fixable or do I need to compile a cygwin1.dll with the ctime
change removed?
--
Josef Drexler | http://jdrexler.com/home/
---------------------------------+----------------------------------------
Please help Conserve Gravity | Email address is *valid*.
Play Chess, not Basketball. | Don't remove the "nospam" part.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -