This is the mail archive of the
automake@gnu.org
mailing list for the automake project.
Re: Automake 1.4l released
- To: "Charles Wilson" <cwilson at ece dot gatech dot edu>
- Subject: Re: Automake 1.4l released
- From: "Tim Van Holder" <tim dot van dot holder at pandora dot be>
- Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:43:20 +0200
- Cc: <automake at gnu dot org>
- List-Id: Discussion list for automake <automake.gnu.org>
> But I'm not talking about FAT or VFAT. I'm talking about NTFS, a whole
> different beast. IMNSHO, the linux and dos behaviors you describe ARE
> the mistake, and cygwin's behavior (on NTFS) is correct -- why should
> you be allowed to change the file metadata (timestamp, etc) if you don't
> have write access to the file?
Don't know - but since the majority of systems allow it, I assume there
is a good reason. For example, it makes perfect sense to change, say, the
archive bit for a read-only file on DOS (to mark it for backup).
Similarly, I see nothing wrong with chown'ing or chmod'ing a read-only
file. So why would the timestamp be handled differently from other file
metadata? In all the cases, the file itself is not written to, which
satisfies the read-only constraint implied by the file's attributes.
So IMHO, cygwin should recognize the "unusual" behaviour of NTFS, and
perhaps internally do 'chmod +w; touch; chmod -w' when changing the
timestamp of a read-only file.