On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 05:25:14PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: >On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 12:51:18AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> >> Hmmm. Which particular timestamp are you talking about using? There >> are 4 available in the iso9660 header: >> >> char creation_date [ISODCL(814, 830)]; >> char modification_date [ISODCL(831, 847)]; >> char expiration_date [ISODCL(848, 864)]; >> char effective_date [ISODCL(865, 881)]; > >Looking at the spec, I guess `modification_date' is what we'll want to use.
Ok, fair enough. >> The easiest way to do this would be just to add extra command line >> options to allow you to override the defaults for (most of) those, >> which is just to use formatted output from localtime(). Then you >> wouldn't need the above --generate-timestamp step at all. > >Sounds fine. I'll send a patch for that, then. Does >"--creation-date=YYYY-MM-DD-HH-mm-ss-hh" syntax sound fine to you? If you can make it generic to allow separate specification of each of the 4 timestamps, that would be cool. :-) -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Can't keep my eyes from the circling sky, Tongue-tied & twisted, Just an earth-bound misfit, I... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
