Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!dual!joe
From: joe@dual.UUCP (Joe Weinstein)
Newsgroups: net.unix,net.unix-wizards
Subject: Does your "ls -lc" equal your "ls -l"?
Message-ID: <1273@dual.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 21-Aug-86 14:53:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: dual.1273
Posted: Thu Aug 21 14:53:45 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 22-Aug-86 08:14:31 EDT
Reply-To: joe@dual.UUCP (Joe Weinstein)
Organization: Dual Systems Corp. Berkeley, Ca.
Lines: 20
Xref: mnetor net.unix:5254 net.unix-wizards:7640

Hi.

	I'm wondering how many UNIX's give the commands

	% ls -l       and       % ls -lc

	the same result for a file that had been modified
	some time after creation, in such a way that the
	inode block list didn't change?
		The c option is supposed to give the inode
	modification date instead of the file modification
	date.  One has to define "inode modification" use-
	fully because even cat'ing a file modifies the inode
	access time field. I think the best definition for
	inode modification is inode creation, so that we
	have a good indicator of file creation date. 
		On our V.2.2, ls -l == ls -lc, though I 
	have jimmied my own kernel to to what I think it
	should.
	Does yours?  What do you think?