Re: ctime vs. Create Time

[Dan O'Reilly <dano%process.com@localhost>]

At 07:50 AM 10/7/2002, Joseph Galbraith wrote:
> > I would much prefer that both creation and modification times be
> preserved.
> > If we're talking about copying a file intact between systems, inevitably,
> > there will be somebody who will have that requirement.  If the field is
> > common (or at least reasonably so), I always vote to preserve it if at all
> > possible.
> >
> > For example, in VMS there are even more time fields kept for a file,
> although
> > I don't expect this standard to address those (unless you're feeling
> > particularly amicable today <grin>).
>
> Well, I might be :-)
>
> I don't remember what they are though; my VMS experience is
> about 10 years ago, so it is growing dimmer and dimmer.
> I was trying to remember if VMS did create time and thought
> that it did.  What other time fields does VMS keep?

If memory serves (I'm not near a VMS system at this point), there is a
backup date and a "shelving" date (when the file was copied to other media,
not as a backup).  I don't know that either would be of any specific value
to keep, however, as those are pretty much specific within the context of
an individual system, and I would think they would tend to lose meaning
when copied to another system.

> Do you think the draft should address them?  Do you think
> they are useful, even if not generally implementable?
>
> - Joseph

------
+-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+
| Dan O'Reilly                  |  "There are 10 types of people in this |
| Principal Engineer            |   world: those who understand binary   |
| Process Software              |   and those who don't."                |
| http://www.process.com        |                                        |
+-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+