Duncan wrote:
> David Leverton posted on Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:35:53 + as excerpted:
>
>> If we're not going to insist on preserving nanoseconds as far as
>> possible, then package managers should be required to explcitly clear
>> the nanoseconds part.
>
> While I'm not sure what it's going to
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:52:00 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> That's a great explanation (thanks, I now know the details to the
> degree I'd be interested), but what was asked for was examples of
> breakage, aka actual bugs.
Why? You can easily look and see that it's broken. Exam
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:13:58 -0700
Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> A quick note to tell you that I have tried to look for examples of
> breakage due to how mtime preservation is currently implemented in
> portage. Unfortunately I didn't find anything, maybe because I'm not
> knowledgeable enough or becaus
