copyright years: mass-update every January 1

2009-06-25 Thread Jim Meyering
Karl Berry just mentioned that it's now considered fine (recommended, even) to update all copyright lists to include the new year on January 1. Before, it was recommended not to do that, but rather to update each list only upon modifying the corresponding file in the course of development. This is

Re: copyright years: mass-update every January 1

2009-06-25 Thread Philip Rowlands
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Jim Meyering wrote: Karl Berry just mentioned that it's now considered fine (recommended, even) to update all copyright lists to include the new year on January 1. I realise this list may not be the right place for GNU policy discussion, but how will this affect the event

Re: copyright years: mass-update every January 1

2009-06-25 Thread Jim Meyering
Philip Rowlands wrote: > On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Jim Meyering wrote: > >> Karl Berry just mentioned that it's now considered fine (recommended, >> even) to update all copyright lists to include the new year on January 1. > > I realise this list may not be the right place for GNU policy > discussion, b

Re: copyright years: mass-update every January 1

2009-06-25 Thread Philip Rowlands
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Jim Meyering wrote: "migration of coreutils works into the public domain" I know of no such plan. I'm refering to the copyright term limits which apply to all works, not a specific plan for coreutils. Cheers, Phil ___ Bu

Re: copyright years: mass-update every January 1

2009-06-25 Thread Alfred M. Szmidt
> "migration of coreutils works into the public domain" > > I know of no such plan. I'm refering to the copyright term limits which apply to all works, not a specific plan for coreutils. It doesn't affect it at all, if you use a version of coreutils from 1980, then the copyright

Re: inotify back end for tail -f on linux

2009-06-25 Thread Pádraig Brady
Jim Meyering wrote: > diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS > index d7695e4..754f9e2 100644 > --- a/NEWS > +++ b/NEWS > @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ GNU coreutils NEWS-*- > outline -*- >sort accepts a new option, --human-numeric-sort (-h): sort numbers >while honoring human re

Re: inotify back end for tail -f on linux

2009-06-25 Thread Jim Meyering
Pádraig Brady wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >> diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS >> index d7695e4..754f9e2 100644 >> --- a/NEWS >> +++ b/NEWS >> @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ GNU coreutils NEWS-*- >> outline -*- >>sort accepts a new option, --human-numeric-sort (-h): sort numbers

Re: inotify back end for tail -f on linux

2009-06-25 Thread Pádraig Brady
Jim Meyering wrote: > Pádraig Brady wrote: >> Jim Meyering wrote: >>> diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS >>> index d7695e4..754f9e2 100644 >>> --- a/NEWS >>> +++ b/NEWS >>> @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ GNU coreutils NEWS-*- >>> outline -*- >>>sort accepts a new option, --human-n

Re: inotify back end for tail -f on linux

2009-06-25 Thread Jim Meyering
Pádraig Brady wrote: ... > Well I was thinking it would be more efficient than polling > as the number of files monitored was increased. How about: > > tail --follow now uses inotify when possible, to be more responsive > to file changes and also be more efficient when many files are monitored. So

Re: copyright years: mass-update every January 1

2009-06-25 Thread Eric Blake
Jim Meyering meyering.net> writes: > I prefer to have one change set per year updating all copyright year lists, > rather than having a copyright-list update as part of the first > change of the year for files modified in the normal course of development. Sounds fine. > So I did the mass-update

Re: copyright years: mass-update every January 1

2009-06-25 Thread Philip Rowlands
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: It doesn't affect it at all, if you use a version of coreutils from 1980, then the copyright term will be from that date. If you use a version from 2100 then it will be from that date. OK, but taken separately the files have/had dates to indicate t

"cannot dereference" error from "chown -RH"

2009-06-25 Thread enh
if i create a dangling symbolic link within a tree, "chown -RH top-of-tree" gets me a "cannot dereference" error. STEPS TO REPRODUCE: cd /tmp mkdir chown-test cd chown-test ln -s poop parp cd .. chown -RH :nogroup chown-test ACTUAL OUTPUT: chown: cannot dereference `chown-test/par