This patch looks promising, thanks, I will be testing it too.
Erez Zadok wrote:
+ (upper inode time being the max of all lower ones).
By the way, I find this policy a little odd. For regular files, it looks like if one lower branch has the highest mtime and another branch has the highest ctime, then the timestamps of the upper file will not match those of any individual lower file (which would be disturbing). Is that correct ? Besides, in order to preserve the invariant, the implementation seems to assume that lower timestamps can only increase over time (which is not true). Wouldn't it be safer to reset the timestamps at the beginning of unionfs_copy_attr_times() too ? Pascal _______________________________________________ unionfs mailing list: http://unionfs.filesystems.org/ unionfs@mail.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
