Re: [boost] Re: Unexpected behaviour of boost::filesystem::equivalent

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-06 13:58:23

At 05:48 AM 12/6/2004, Daniel Krügler wrote:

 >Your implementation works fine, although I wonder how it interacts
 >with the original assertions made in the code (to which I can't give
 >definite statements, but they seemed to suggest that the new
 >implementation should not be sufficient).

There continues to be concern on Windows, particularly where the media 
isn't a hard disk but is something like a CD-ROM, floppy, or memory card 
which has been formatted and duplicated by a program which ignores the 
specification and intent of volume serial number and last write time, and 
possibly file name.

It seems a shame to give up on equivalence testing because of such an 
extreme corner case.

Any feedback about situations actually encountered by users will be 
appreciated.

Thanks,

--Beman

PS: Other operating systems besides Windows may have similar issues; volume 
serial numbers (or equivalent) were common on batch processing systems that 
had to cope with a large number of mounts per second (due to automated tape 
library systems.)