X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 21:09:41 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: rebase keeps last modification time of DLL unchanged
Message-ID: <20120309200941.GD18960@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <4F57DC0F.2090401@t-online.de> <20120308093206.GR5159@calimero.vinschen.de> <4F5918A2.4090707@t-online.de> <20120309084307.GA5159@calimero.vinschen.de> <20120309154754.GB31291@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <4F5A4A5F.7090207@t-online.de> <20120309194733.GA18960@calimero.vinschen.de> <20120309195552.GA1632@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120309195552.GA1632@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie.com@cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe@cygwin.com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help@cygwin.com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com

On Mar  9 14:55, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 08:47:33PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Mar  9 19:22, Christian Franke wrote:
> >> Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> >I don't think the default should change but maybe an option could be
> >> >added for people who want to see updated times.
> >> 
> >> Agree.
> >
> >I'm not so sure this option would make a lot of sense.  An option not
> >used by rebaseall by default won't be used anyway.  We should decide
> >which behaviour makes more sense and then just do it.
> 
> Why couldn't it be an option for rebaseall?
> 
> Frankly, I don't really want to see the modification time of all of my
> dlls change when I run rebaseall.  I'd rather have the date match what's
> in the package.

Yeah, that's the other point.

> But, I can see why somebody might not want that behavior.

But even if we add an option, what's the more useful default?  The
average use will not use the option, so the default setting should
be what makes most sense and is least surprising.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

