Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 10:51:26 -0700 From: David Greenman <dg@root.com> To: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> Cc: "David E. Cross" <crossd@cs.rpi.edu>, Ronald G Minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: exec() doesn't update access time Message-ID: <20010726105126.G18533@nexus.root.com> In-Reply-To: <20010726120917.A93478@walton.maths.tcd.ie>; from dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie on Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 12:09:17PM %2B0100 References: <rminnich@lanl.gov> <200107252013.QAA00335@cs.rpi.edu> <20010725142519.D14981@nexus.root.com> <20010726120917.A93478@walton.maths.tcd.ie>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 02:25:19PM -0700, David Greenman wrote: >> Guessing, I think the correct fix is probably to set the IN_ACCESS flag in >> ufs_open() [and similarly with other filesystems where this makes sense] if >> the filesystem is not mounted with the noatime flag. However, I'm not sure >> of the symantics of the access time in the relavent standards, and I seem >> to recall Bruce saying that it was incorrect to indicate an access on just >> an open(), but I may be mistaken. > >Wouldn't setting the access time on open mess up the "last read >time" for people's mail boxes when mail was delivered? Probably. Now that you mention it, it seems kind of bogus for a file write to not be considered an "access". -DG David Greenman Co-founder, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org President, TeraSolutions, Inc. - http://www.terasolutions.com Pave the road of life with opportunities. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010726105126.G18533>