Hi all,
I agree with Sean, as said in the bug. The reason we have in the
documentation that it can be possibly truncated is most likely related
to older linux's that wouldn't support it... If the data is there and
available, why explicitly truncate it?
Also note that the workaround also doesn't w
Just to add another though...
I was just double-reading the documentation and it says:
"All platforms support file-modification times to the nearest second,
but some provide more precision. The argument will be truncated to fit
the supported precision."
So, if the platform supports it, the argum
Hi Brian,
I think it's worth fixing unless there are objections. I see Stuart's
comment about compatibility and wonder if we've any examples of such
applications.
I just put together a patch [1] for this. I'm still figuring out how
nanoseconds get recorded for macosx. stat64.st_mtimespec.tv_
Hi,
It would be interesting to know what operating system and file system
this occurs on.
Any truncation would be due to the underlying OS and filesystem type.
Recall floppy drives, I vaguely recall that the filesystem only had per
file info to a 1 second resolution.
$.02, Roger
On 3/31/201
Hi Ricardo,
Thanks for reading the specification verbiage closely. I think you have a
point. I’d like to read what others think about this.
Regards,
Brian
On Mar 31, 2017, at 1:35 AM, Ricardo Almeida wrote:
> Just to add another though...
>
> I was just double-reading the documentation and
As noted in [1], it looks like the specification [2] already dealt with the
situation via the "possibly truncated" phrase:
"If the operation succeeds and no intervening operations on the file take
place, then the next invocation of the lastModified() method will return the
(possibly truncated)
Ricardo,
I see that JDK-8177809[1] has been logged. The newer NIO APIs can report
back with higher time precision and it's probably best to use those.
JDK-6939260 is related to your issue also.
Returning a ms value not equal to the ms value used in the
setLastModified call does seem strange.
Hi Ricardo,
This isn't a build issue. Redirecting to core-libs-dev. Please don't
reply to build-dev.
Thanks,
David
On 30/03/2017 12:40 AM, Ricardo Almeida wrote:
Hi,
I could not raise a bug in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/ so I hope it
is ok to say it here, hoping someone can take a look a