Re: [PATCH 2/2] Windows: Skip fstat/lstat optimization in write_entry()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



2009/4/20 Dmitry Potapov <dpotapov@xxxxxxxxx>:
> The cygwin version has the same problem. (In fact, it is even worse,
> because we have an optimized version for lstat/stat but not for fstat,
> and they return different values for some fields like i_no). But even
> if we used the only Cygwin functions, we would still face the problem,
> because Windows returns the wrong values for timestamps (and maybe
> even size on FAT?). So I think the following patch should be squashed
> on top.

I just sent a patch with an "optimized" fstat. I see no problems (at least none
like these) with that patch. Timestamps match. Windows XP, yes. But since
that MSDN article mentions that it is not guaranteed, I guess I just been lucky.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]