Michael Salmon wrote:
> | > It seems pertinent to ask if anyone knows whether changing the ctime
> | > rather than the atime will make the mail agents any happier about the
> | file > being unmodified? There's no point implementing it if it won't
> | solve the > problem.
> |
> | I use mutt, and when I use my preserve-atime-patch, things work right.
> | Without it, things don't (mutt thinks none of my new mailboxes have new
> | mail after I rsync them).
>
> What happens when your system is backed up?
Everything works fine; but I backup based on mtimes, and I use cpio, with
the preserve atime option. ;)
I think it is somewhat silly to worry about the clobbered inode data. If
people are preserving atimes, they know the cost. Plus it's easy to
document and even print a warning so people know what is lost if atime is
preserved.
--
Bradley M. Kuhn - http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn
PGP signature
