On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 11:26:24AM -0400, Peter Staubach wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >What's the basis for that interpretation? The language seems extremely
> >clear:
> >
> > "On successful completion, if the file size is changed, these
> > functions will mark for update the st_ctime and st_mtime fields
> > of the file, and if the file is a regular file, the S_ISUID and
> > S_ISGID bits of the file mode may be cleared."
> >
> >Why are you concerned about this? Do you have an actual application
> >that breaks?
>
> Yes, there is a customer who is quite unhappy that the semantics over Linux
> client NFS are different than those of BSD, Solaris, and local file system
> access on Linux itself. The basis for my work is based on a bugzilla from
> this customer.
OK; just out of curiosity, what's the url/bug number/whatever?
> My interpretation is based on looking at the local behavior on Linux, which
> changes mtime/ctime even if the file size does not change, and SunOS, which
> changes mtime/ctime even if the file size does not change and is very
> heavily SUSv3 compliant.
Fair enough.
> In this case, "changed" does not mean "made different". It simply means
> that the file size is set to the new value.
That's ridiculous, though; that's just not what "changed" means, and
that renders the "if" clause redundant. Better just to say "SUS is
wrong, and this is what everybody actually does...."
--b.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
