From owner-freebsd-current Fri Aug 3 14:18:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from root.com (unknown [209.102.106.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 794A437B406 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:18:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dg@root.com) Received: (from dg@localhost) by root.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) id f73L4Jq67199; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:04:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dg) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:04:19 -0700 From: David Greenman To: Bruce Evans Cc: Will Andrews , Christian Weisgerber , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: What's touching my executables? Message-ID: <20010803140419.E62297@nexus.root.com> References: <20010802153808.A62297@nexus.root.com> <20010804060030.R13873-100000@besplex.bde.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010804060030.R13873-100000@besplex.bde.org>; from bde@zeta.org.au on Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 06:08:58AM +1000 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, David Greenman wrote: > >> >On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 06:28:59PM +0000, Christian Weisgerber (naddy@mips.inka.de) wrote: >> >Probably the recent change (IIRC) that someone turned running an >> >executable into a mtime change. >> >> There was no such change. I proposed a change that would update the atime, >> but that was not committed because it has some bad side effects. > >I didn't see that. I saw when you objected to me fixing the bug many >years ago :-). The atime update was too slow for executables on nfs >filesystems. I only used it to reduce the number of non-conformances >found by the NIST Posix test suite. There is now a PR about this bug >(kern/25777) with a very broken patch in it (it assume that all >filesystems are ufs and hacks on ufs's IN_ACCESS flag). I tried to fix the problem in the VOP_OPEN (specifically, ufs_open), since it seemed reasonable at the time that an open should be considered an 'access'. Unfortunately it was pointed out that this would break some things like 'mail unread since...', which depends on open/writes/close with no reads to not change the access time on the user's mail spool file. -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-current" in the body of the message