On Thu, 2002-10-24 04:04:14 -0700, jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 12:16:26PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > > I think '--preserve-server-atime' would be a nice additional feature, > > and I tend to implement it on monday or so. I haven't yet looked at the > > source, so there may be already a solution to this problem. If you think > > this is a nice feature, please give some response... > > .from rsync3.txt by Martin Pool > | - Propagate atimes and do not modify them. This is very > | ugly on Unix. It might be better to try to add > | O_NOATIME to kernels, and call that.
It's not yet there, and SUSv3 doesn't propose it either...
> It would be better to call it --reset-access-time as cpio
> does. Not only to make it easier to remember (for those
I don't care about the feature's name. So I'll use --reset-access-time
or --atime-preserve (as tar does).
> using other tools) but to make it clear that the access time
> is being reset to a value that will not reflect accesses by
> other activity between initial stat and the final reset.
>
> Beyond that I don't much care. All my filesystems are mounted -o
> noatime,nodiratime for efficiency.
However, you're loosing data by this:-) You can't tell when some last
access has happened...
> Personally, i think any MUA that depends on atime is broken by design.
You're using one of them. Despite that, MUAs come to my mind which might
want to use st_atime. But there might exist other applications as well.
This is why I care about the issue. My st_atimes will be correct some
minutes later (as I receive huge amounts of email), though.
MfG, JBG
--
- Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf für
- einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger
Gegen Zensur im Internet
Jan-Benedict Glaw . [EMAIL PROTECTED] . +49-172-7608481
-- New APT-Proxy written in shell script --
http://lug-owl.de/~jbglaw/software/ap2/
msg05296/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
