From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] "sleep 1" sleeps too little on cygwin Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:24:27 -0800 Message-ID: <7vr774dqjo.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <81b0412b0601170325y60094b4w693ac37490c67410@mail.gmail.com> <7vmzhtzzlf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v4q41zd1t.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20060118185229.GA3001@steel.home> <7vmzhtqakl.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <81b0412b0601190701g2696b1a9l14f3d288875e11ab@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org, Christopher Faylor X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jan 19 19:29:40 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EzeSX-0001bx-JJ for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:24:35 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030233AbWASSYb (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:24:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030275AbWASSYb (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:24:31 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao12.cox.net ([68.230.241.27]:54942 "EHLO fed1rmmtao12.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030233AbWASSY3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:24:29 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao12.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060119182152.JLO17437.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:21:52 -0500 To: Alex Riesen User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Alex Riesen writes: > Works if sleep is for 2 secs (I completely forgot about that stupid > FAT granularity!) > st_ino is always the same (it is a hash of pathname). > Christopher, how is that supposed to work with hardlinks? (NTFS has > hardlinks, BTW) So the verdict is to take your patch but wait for three seconds? I still have mild aversion about $SECONDS though...