From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-09 15:33:23
At 06:38 PM 10/8/2004, Stefan Slapeta wrote:
>Beman Dawes wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> That was meant read:
>>
>> buf.actime = std::time(0)
>>
>
>funny :)
>
>>
>> Now, it may be a poor design to update actime to the current time. It
>> might be better to do a stat(), and get st_atime, and then use that.
>> Opinions?
>>
>
>IMO the really poor design is that of ::utime which forces you to set
>both the access time and the write time in the same call;
Yes, that's for sure.
>I'm afraid you have no choice but to determine the actual access time
>before (as you suggested) :(
I've committed the changes to CVS.
Thanks,
--Beman