On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 04:36:06PM EST, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Feb 2004, Thomas Glanzmann wrote:
> > > The access time wouldn't be useful for cygwin.
> >
> > This isn't an issue because we can fallback on modification time for
> > cygwin.
>
> But the point was that access time is not portable (and I seem to recall
> noting that it is a feature of the filesystem rather than the operating
> environment).
Well, Mutt can check at runtime whether or not the FS is mounted noatime
by simply creating a temp file, waiting a second, then reading it,
and seeing what the atime is at that point. It can then use the atime
optimization (assuming it works at all) if the atime is actually updated,
or else fallback to mtimes.
- Dave
BTW - Mounting a filesystem noatime disables part of the POSIX-dictated
functionality, and as such can't be done by a Linux distribution (i.e.,
an operating system) without forfeiting POSIX compliance. ("Yeah, go
tell that on the mountain ... see if anybody listens. . .") Windows,
of course, is in violation of so many POSIX rules that it's basically
hopeless. The only rationale in having fallback behavior for it is that
it's widely used.
--
Uncle Cosmo, why do they call this a word processor?
It's simple, Skyler. You've seen what food processors do to food, right?
Please visit this link:
http://rotter.net/israel
Attachment:
pgp5UuHoVUl7q.pgp
Description: PGP signature