[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Bug in copy-file

From: Andreas Schwab
Subject: Re: Bug in copy-file
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:18:05 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.090014 (Oort Gnus v0.14) Emacs/21.3.50 (ia64-suse-linux)

Lars Hansen <address@hidden> writes:

|> Andreas Schwab wrote:
|> >Lars Hansen <address@hidden> writes:
|> >
|> >|> A bug has been introduced since Emacs 21.2.
|> >|> A "!" has been added where it should not be.
|> >|> As a consequence the keep-time parameter functions
|> >|> opposite of what is intended. The patch below
|> >|> should fix the problem.
|> >
|> >Why do you think so?  The use of keep-time is correct according to the
|> >doc string.
|> >
|> >Andreas.
|> >
|> Maybe I am misreading the code or the doc string. I read them like this:
|> Doc string says:
|>     Fourth arg KEEP-TIME non-nil means give the new file the same
|>     last-modified time as the old one.
|> But when keep_time is non-nil, NILP (keep_time) is false, so !NILP
|> (keep_time)
|> is true. Thus the code following if (NILP (keep_time)) is entered. In
|> this code it
|> reads
|>        EMACS_GET_TIME (now);
|> and
|>        if (set_file_times (filename, now, now))
|> so the time is set to now, not kept.
|> Am I wrong?

No, you are right.  I didn't know that windows is backwards.

|> By the way, it is easy to test: Just do eg:

You first need to install a proprietary operating system, which is a very
difficult and expensive part.


Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, address@hidden
SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 N├╝rnberg
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]