Greetings, Paul Eggert! > On 3/31/25 12:26, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> ls(1) always potentially shows a past state anyway.
> Sure, but traditionally (and I'm talking about 7th edition Unix) a single > output line of 'ls' corresponded to a state obtained atomically from the > file system. I realize we can't always do that nowadays but the further we > depart from it, the worse 'ls' users will be. The link dereferencing is a courtesy of LS, and in no way it is guaranteed to be stable in a long run. As Corinna pointed out, even the state LS is displayed could be stale by the time it reached the user's eyes. -- With best regards, Andrey Repin Tuesday, April 1, 2025 13:05:20 Sorry for my terrible english... -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
