Zhaoming Luo, le lun. 17 févr. 2025 10:16:42 +0800, a ecrit: > On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 10:39:42AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Zhaoming Luo, le dim. 16 févr. 2025 16:22:01 +0800, a ecrit: > > > In test_filechanged.vim, those three parts are the sources of fail: > > > > > > https://github.com/vim/vim/blob/master/src/testdir/test_filechanged.vim#L15-L18 > > > https://github.com/vim/vim/blob/master/src/testdir/test_filechanged.vim#L57-L60 > > > https://github.com/vim/vim/blob/master/src/testdir/test_filechanged.vim#L76-L79 > > > > > > nanotime feature: Compiled with sub-second time stamp checks. > > > > > > I think we can disable the 'nanotime' feature in the Debian build stage, > > > or > > > extend the filesystem so it supports sub-second time stamp. Not sure if > > > it's what the entry of 'Extend ext2fs to support 64bit time.' in the > > > TODO list means. > > > > 64bit is about the width of the tv_sec field. > > > > sub-second is about supporting the tv_nsec field at all. More precisely, > > for ext2fs it's about supporting > > i_ctime_extra/i_mtime_extra/i_atime_extra in the inode. > > > I see. It will require the modification of ext2fs driver. Which method > is more decent? Submit a patch to vim so vim is friendly to the fses not > supporting sub-second precision or modify our ext2fs driver?
Ideally we'd really support sub-second in ext2fs. It should not be that hard, it "just" requires carefully checking how it's supposed to be stored, the compatibility flags etc. Samuel
