Re: [PATCH] utimensat implementation

[H. Peter Anvin]

Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> I'm a bit leery of abusing the timespec value like this, though.  A
>> flags field seem like it would be cleaner.
> 
> It's ugly.  Then you have the parameter, which might have nice valid
> values, and they get ignored.  I thought about it when this was
> discussed in the working group and thought it's a toss up.

It's pretty ugly either way :-/

>> Something else... if we're dickering with these interfaces, shouldn't we
>> allow setting atime as well?
> 
> Why?  To allow somebody to hide her/his tracks?

Primarily to let a backup program restore the full state of the filesystem.

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/