From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Dec 30 14:20:25 1994 Return-Path: questions-owner Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id OAA01579 for questions-outgoing; Fri, 30 Dec 1994 14:20:25 -0800 Received: from halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu (halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.159]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id OAA01573 for ; Fri, 30 Dec 1994 14:20:24 -0800 Received: by halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu; id AA05940; Fri, 30 Dec 1994 17:20:17 -0500 Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 17:20:17 -0500 From: Garrett Wollman Message-Id: <9412302220.AA05940@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu> To: Chuck Bacon Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Why does ls report wrong creation date on symlinks? In-Reply-To: <199412302118.QAA02761@upcoming.dcrt.nih.gov> References: <199412302118.QAA02761@upcoming.dcrt.nih.gov> Sender: questions-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk < said: > I had previously noted that all directories in a MSDOSFS tree carry > as their creation date, the current moment. Somebody suggested that > this was a capricious choice, in view of the impossibility of > duplicating the creation date which DOS would report. I wonder > if there is a link between these two bugs. None whatsoever. The POSIX definition of symbolic links is written to allow them to be directory entries, and the 4.4 code simulates this. All the traditional ``inode'' values of symbolic links are ignored, and system calls always return the values from the parent directory. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | Shashish is simple, it's discreet, it's brief. ... wollman@lcs.mit.edu | Shashish is the bonding of hearts in spite of distance. Opinions not those of| It is a bond more powerful than absence. We like people MIT, LCS, ANA, or NSA| who like Shashish. - Claude McKenzie + Florent Vollant