Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> What problem arises in coreutils if we don't detect/work-around
>> that difference?
>
> For example, 'touch -r A B', 'cp -p A B', etc. could set B's timestamp
> to be in the future; this could give 'make' conniptions.

Oh, of course.  That would be nasty indeed.

>> I think that the bug in glibc won't end up lasting long
>> enough to make it onto a significant number of systems.
>> And for those users who are progressive (or maybe reckless :-) enough
>> that they get a losing glibc, I think it's reasonable to expect
>> them to upgrade pretty quickly to a version with the fix.
>
> OK, let's assume this for now.  (Yay!  It's less work.)

I implemented it for coreutils and checked it in a couple hours ago.


_______________________________________________
Bug-coreutils mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils

Reply via email to