On Thu, 22 Nov 2007, Harlan Stenn wrote:
I use the last one quite often these days but sometimes I use the
first.
More than likely the various different possibilities I pointed out
seem a bit tiresome but they will eventually be important to someone.
I did miss one important case which is t
And of course, NFS file attribute caching can make detecting clock skew
a whole lot more interesting.
H
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > I *think* I'd be happy with 'clock skew in the build directory'.
>
> You mean like
>
>CPU -- NFS (Sources + Objects)
This is one case I know I care about.
> or
>
> NFS1 (Sources)
> /
>CPU
> \
>
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007, Harlan Stenn wrote:
All of these problems are possible. Some issues are seen by GNU make
and others are not.
I *think* I'd be happy with 'clock skew in the build directory'.
You mean like
CPU -- NFS (Sources + Objects)
or
NFS1 (Sources)
/
CPU
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> >
> > A variety of problems can crop up if one is "doing things" in an
> > NFS-mounted filesystem and there is clock skew between the local machine
> > (NFS client box) and the machine that hosts the actual filesystem (NFS
> > ser
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Harlan Stenn wrote:
A variety of problems can crop up if one is "doing things" in an
NFS-mounted filesystem and there is clock skew between the local machine
(NFS client box) and the machine that hosts the actual filesystem (NFS
server box).
I suggest that you check out s
I have not put enough thought into the following.
A variety of problems can crop up if one is "doing things" in an
NFS-mounted filesystem and there is clock skew between the local machine
(NFS client box) and the machine that hosts the actual filesystem (NFS
server box).
I am thinking there may
