UnixWare 2.03 patch

[mouring at etoh.eviladmin.org]

On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Tim Rice wrote:

> On Thu, 4 Jan 2001 mouring at etoh.eviladmin.org wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Gert Doering wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 04:14:15PM -0600, mouring at etoh.eviladmin.org wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Tim Rice wrote:
> > > > > Here is a patch to help UnixWare 2.03 along.
> > > > > 
> > > > > No if we could only change utimes() back to utime() in scp.c & sftp-server.c
> > > > > we would have a working versin for Unixware 2.03 and SCO 3.2v4.2
> > > > > 
> > > > One could always write a utime() emulation via utimes().
> > > 
> > > Yes, but this leaves my previous question unanswered: why bother with
> > > emulating utimes() via utime(), instead of using the more portable utime()
> > > directly?
> > > 
> > > The only benefit of utimes() is the millisecond resolution, which
> > > OpenSSH doesn't use (at least not last time I checked, tv_usec was
> > > explicitely set to 0).
> > > 
> > Either way... We will need to emulate one or the other.  Personally I
> 
> All the systems I have encountered with utimes, also have utime.
> But not all systems have utimes. Some have utime only.
> Are there any system that have utimes but not utime?
> 
NeXTStep for one

So which ever we pick we will have to provide some form of
emulation.

- Ben