X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 21:09:41 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: rebase keeps last modification time of DLL unchanged Message-ID: <20120309200941.GD18960@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <4F57DC0F DOT 2090401 AT t-online DOT de> <20120308093206 DOT GR5159 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4F5918A2 DOT 4090707 AT t-online DOT de> <20120309084307 DOT GA5159 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20120309154754 DOT GB31291 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4F5A4A5F DOT 7090207 AT t-online DOT de> <20120309194733 DOT GA18960 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20120309195552 DOT GA1632 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT 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 AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT 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