On Wed, 07 May 2008 00:44:28 +0200
"Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> and I think that would be the correct thing to do, but either way I'd
> like PMS to specify what should happen wrt to mtimes, so that I can
> rely on that.

PMS makes no guarantee as to what happens with mtimes, which means you
can't rely upon things happening one way or the other. This is
deliberate -- preserving mtimes leads to all kinds of weirdness on
packages that are generated from a raw tar file rather than from a
build system.

> Current work-around is tarring up and untarring to preserve mtimes.

That's not really any good either. The proper solution would be to fix
whatever it is that's mtime-sensitive.

Ciaran McCreesh

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to