On 19/11/2010 18:23, [email protected] wrote:
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 06:00:45PM +0000, Peter Dennis wrote:
Hello,

A question on timestamps when files are delivered to a system.

o when doing the install the files receive timestamps based
   upon the time of the install:

  machine1:
  ls -l -% all ant
  -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     bin         9807 Mar 30  2010 ant
           timestamp: atime         Nov 17 12:44:40 2010
           timestamp: ctime         Mar 30 13:28:51 2010
           timestamp: mtime         Mar 30 13:28:51 2010
           timestamp: crtime         Mar 30 13:28:51 2010

  machine2:
  ls -l -% all ant
  -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     bin         9807 Oct 13 18:21 ant
           timestamp: atime         Nov 17 12:55:10 2010
           timestamp: ctime         Oct 13 18:21:53 2010
           timestamp: mtime         Oct 13 18:21:53 2010
           timestamp: crtime         Oct 13 18:21:53 2010

  machine3:
   ls -l -% all ant
  -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     bin         9807 Nov 10 14:03 ant
           timestamp: atime         Nov 17 12:49:56 2010
           timestamp: ctime         Nov 10 14:03:21 2010
           timestamp: mtime         Nov 10 14:03:21 2010
           timestamp: crtime         Nov 10 14:03:21 2010

I note that for file actions there is a timestamp attribute but it
is only used for very few ON files.

Should the mtime be consistent across installs ?

I'm afraid you'll need to provide some more information.  Does the ant
file have a timestamp in its manifest?

No. It was just an example file.

If so, that's what the atime and
mtime should be set to.  Otherwise, you're depending on implementation
specific behavior.  The code in action.file makes a temporary file, and
copies the content of the file in the download cache into that tempfile.
The tempfile is then renamed to the name of the file that's being
installed.  The transport will preserve the file times from the remote
side on download, but the install code doesn't copy over the atime/mtime
attributes right now -- unless there's a timestamp in the manifest --
because there hasn't really been any need.

Okay - and that was the answer I was looking for - essentially this means
it is something that pkg(5) can handle (by setting a timestamp attribute
in the manifest) but it is something that has not been implemented
in the manifests - and so the question then translates should it be ?
But that I would guess is not within the scope of this forum.

thanks
pete

-j
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to