Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 73502 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jul 2003 06:09:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 73474 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2003 06:09:11 -0000 Errors-To: Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030709010718.03961848@pop3.rowe-clan.net> X-Sender: wrowe%rowe-clan.net@pop3.rowe-clan.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 01:09:12 -0500 To: "William A. Rowe, Jr." From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." Subject: Re: setting timestamps Cc: Cliff Woolley , Ben Collins-Sussman , dev In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030708232812.04732e70@pop3.rowe-clan.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N At 11:30 PM 7/8/2003, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >The general suggestion is goodness, but the patch below would >continue to promote ctime ambiguity. I'm sorry, now I see this isn't the set-mtime-ctime-atime patch, but sets the mtime member discretely. That would be fine for all platforms. Of course we add each supported time stamp per-platform, so win32 gets a crtime_set, and unix an itime_set (or perhaps imtime, e.g. the inode modified time?) Semantics aside, this patch did look like a good idea. Bill