Re: Re: Perfomance problem backupscript (more details and tests)

Les Mikesell <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 13:05, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > ctime is indeed the natural choice for a name change 
> > indicating timestamp. The only problem is that it 
> > always was so clearly designated to have a different
> > meaning.
>
> > > not adjusting it in rename is broken. 
> > 
> > The lack of a name change indicating timestamp is a
> > birth defect of Unix.
>
> No, unix originally required link() and unlink() operations
> to create a new name and remove the old one. Each changed
> the inode link count, and thus ctime().  I think the atomic
> version of rename may have appeared in SCO's Xenix although
> it did not break the filesystem semanatics - it just did both
> operations with the inode locked.  Linux variations are the
> ones that first ignored the side effects of shortcuts.

No, rename predates SCO - rename() has been introduced by BSD-4.2

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:[email protected] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       [email protected]		(uni)  
       [email protected]	(work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily