Subject: Re: bug#73709: 29.4; Doc of `file-newer-than-file-p'

From: Michael Heerdegen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 03:32:32 +0200

Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> writes:

> Two issues:
>
>   . "last written to" is incorrect if that time stamp was modified by
>     set-file-times and similar methods
>   . the interpretation of mtime to mean "newer" (per the function's
>     name) is problematic/incorrect when a file is copied with the
>     KEEP-TIME argument of copy-file (and similar facilities of other
>     commands, like 'cp')
>
> I'm asking whether we care about these subtleties.  E.g., someone
> might claim that the second issue above means that
> file-newer-than-file-p has a bug.

I would say that these things are means available to instruct the file
system which times it should report.  They don't necessarily collide
with the concept.

> The current doc string says simply that last-modification times are
> compared, and I wonder if that is not better left alone.

Or, we could also use that as a clarification of the description of the
concept on an internal level?

But anyway, if you have a good feeling about the current state I'm also
fine with it.

Michael.