Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Biglobe-Sender: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: Bug in C02cont.ztst's -N test From: "Jun T." In-Reply-To: <160509092158.ZM13643@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 02:32:18 +0900 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <9FAAD096-2119-4354-B437-4D9A0ABD2765@kba.biglobe.ne.jp> References: <160429131027.ZM22749@torch.brasslantern.com> <20160430004639.GA1360@tarsus.local2> <20160430010131.GA34472@CptOrmolo.darkstar> <20160430012828.GA3334@tarsus.local2> <160430105547.ZM10892@torch.brasslantern.com> <160430111131.ZM11437@torch.brasslantern.com> <160509092158.ZM13643@torch.brasslantern.com> To: zsh-workers@zsh.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Biglobe-Spnum: 53258 X-Seq: zsh-workers 38449 2016/05/10 01:21, Bart Schaefer wrote: > Do we need to "sleep 2" before touching $newnewnew, though? Or could > that part stay in the "elif"? On a system where the nanosecond timestamps are not supported (for example Mac OS X with the default file system HFS+), in order for the test '$newnewnew -nt $zlnfs' to succeed, the mtime's of the two files should have at least 1 second difference. If the sleep is left in the 'elif' block, then the test (for -nt) fails on OS X. I tried with 'sleep 1' before 'touch $newnewnew' and it seems to work. There are some tests between 'touch $zlnfs' (near the top of the script) and the 'touch $newnewnew', so 'sleep 1' would be enough even if there is some inaccuracy in sleep period. Or it may be better to sleep 2 second just in case ... Why does the original code sleeps 2 sec (instead of 1 sec).