Steffen Daode Nurpmeso <sdao...@googlemail.com> added the comment:
After half an hour of shallow inspection.
mutt really modifies mailbox files in place (mbox_sync_mailbox())
after creating (all the new tail in) a temporary file. Then
seek()/write()/truncate() etc.. It however has mutt_dotlock(1)
and it does block signals and it is a standalone program and thus
i don't think this behaviour can be used by Python.
In respect to our issue here i must really admit that mutt does:
prepare new tail
stat box
modify box to incorporate tail
close box
utime box with stat result times
reopen box
So actually the result looks as if it never has been modified.
But maybe it is because like this it is in sync with the standart,
since strictly speaking there is no *new* mail in the box.
Unless you vote against it i'll write a patch tomorrow which will
use a state machine which only triggers the utime if some kind of
setitem has occurred. I can't help you to overcome your malaise
against soiling an atime's pureness.
'Really want a future date??
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue11935>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
