On 03/03/2010 08:34 PM, Mikhail Gusarov wrote: > > Twas brillig at 17:31:12 03.03.2010 UTC-05 when behdad@xxxxxxxxxx did gyre and gimble: > > BE> Did you see the comment I left on the bug last week? > BE> http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25535 > > Ah, no, missed it. As it is a discussion item, let's discuss here. > > "This changes the cache format on FAT filesystems. Not a huge deal, but > I'd rather you just emulate correct mtime instead of using a hash. That > would require stating all the files in the directory and taking the max > mtime I guess?" > > Nope. Imagine the following directory: > > foo/ > a.txt (mtime 12345) > b.txt (mtime 6789) > > Adding file c.txt with mtime 4444 will not change max(mtime). Deleting > file b.txt will not change max(mtime). Windows does not change mtime > while copying or moving files. > > I gave it a thought before writing a patch - directory mtime changes > every time contents of directory changes, so the only substitute for > mtime if it is not available is a checksum of directory contents, it > can't be reliable emulated by just looking at files inside. I see. I'll review and commit the patch as is then. Thanks, behdad _______________________________________________ Fontconfig mailing list Fontconfig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/fontconfig
