Re: use lutimens

[Eric Blake]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

According to Eric Blake on 10/9/2009 10:13 AM:
> Eric Blake <ebb9 <at> byu.net> writes:
> 
>> This patch is pending my utimensat work on gnulib, but looks pretty slick; 
>> replacing a #if and 12 lines of code with just 1 (modulo the testsuite 
>> tweak).
> 
> Next cool patch, also pending on my gnulib utimensat changes.  Again, a net 
> reduction in code size, plus the added benefit of fewer syscalls for 'touch 
> -a' 
> in the case where native utimensat works.

Now that I've pushed the gnulib patches for utimens, I've put this series
on the next branch.  OK to merge onto the master branch?

Hmm, I had to push a merge commit to get the next branch updated.  The
'non-fast forward' rejection rule for master makes sense, but for the
'next' branch, should we relax it to allow rebasing without merge commits?

Eric Blake (3):
      build: update gnulib submodule to latest, for utimens improvements
      copy: allow symlink timestamp preservation on more systems
      touch: optimize use of utimens

- --
Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well!

Eric Blake             address@hidden
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkrQqugACgkQ84KuGfSFAYAeXQCfYlIfI1afnwjH6kIlc0c1Horh
9fMAniAKnIoGjF82q/O+FNOzrwtXfI1C
=nlW4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----