Re: ReiserFS patch for updating ctimes of renamed files

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

Alex, are you convinced by jw?  (I think I am.)  Would you be willing to 
submit a patch for tar instead?

Hans

jw schultz wrote:

>On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 09:49:20AM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote:
>  
>
> In theory it is cleaner and purer to do it the way we did. In practice,
>
>>Alex's problem seems like a real one, and I don't know how hard it is to 
>>change tar to do the right thing.  We'll discuss it in a small seminar 
>>today.
>>    
>>
>
>Updating ctime does seem messy and a bit irrelevant for the
>atomic rename.  You are modifying the directories not the
>fricken file. This isn't DOS!  But it would seem he does
>indeed have an issue although i'm not sure what.  I've never
>used the listed-incremental option of tar and since the
>manpage is incomplete <rant deleted> i don't know what it
>actually does.  However, i have found the use of ctime to be
>terribly unreliable for file management and given what the
>standards have to say on the issue it sounds like tar is
>being abused or has a bug.
>
>
>  
>


-- 
Hans