Nilmoni Deb <ndeb@ece.cmu.edu> writes:
> On 1 Oct 2001, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> > Or vice versa, as touch will also go back in time.
>
> This is not a good idea because once the user has to remember the exact
> time stamp before the move and put that on the moved dir using touch.
You add a mv -p option to do it for you.
> > My question is which semantics are desirable, and why. I conceed
> > that something has changed. And that changing the functionality back
> > to the way it was before may be desireable. But given that the
> > directory is in fact changed my gut reaction is that the new behavior
> > is more correct than the old behavior.
>
> U r right but most users won't care too much about the ".." link inside
> each dir. Its the other files that really count. If the other files
> remain unchanged then they consider the dir as unchanged.
O.k. So nothing breaks and we just have a suprising change to more
correct behavior. Given that I don't see the case for making a special
case in the code.
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 07 2001 - 21:00:17 EST