"Richard L. Hamilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In favor of a O_NOATIME flag, it looks like Linux has this, defined as
> > > O_NOATIME
> > > (Since Linux 2.6.8) Do not update the file last access time (st_atime in
> > > the inode) when the file is read(2). This flag is intended for use by
> > > indexing or backup programs, where its use can significantly reduce the
> > > amount of disk activity. This flag may not be effective on all
> > > filesystems.
> > > One example is NFS, where the server maintains the access time.
>
> but if they have any fine-grained privilege keeping it from being abused, I
> didn't see that (and think that perhaps we should, with the flag silently
> ignored
> in the absence of that privilege, which shouldn't _break_ anything, just
> wouldn't
> hand it out willy-nilly).
Linux allows it to the file owner and in case of: capable(CAP_FOWNER)
which looks similar to our PRIV_FILE_OWNER
The question is whether this is what we like ;-)
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-code mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
