I had the exact same reaction, I think I saw the time created and liked
that semantic. When it morphed into inode change time, as a source
management guy, I'd much rather have create time than changed time
since I already got access and modified times.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 01:31:37PM +1100, Rob Pike wrote:
Or perhaps the comment was wrong?
I do remember being confused by it.
-rob
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 1:19???PM Theodore Ts'o <tytso(a)mit.edu> wrote:
> As part of a discusion on the Linux kernel mailing list, there was an
> assertion that ctime was orginally "creation time".
>
> From the v7 sources in TUHS, we can see:
>
> struct dinode
> {
> unsigned short di_mode; /* mode and type of file */
> short di_nlink; /* number of links to file */
> short di_uid; /* owner's user id */
> short di_gid; /* owner's group id */
> off_t di_size; /* number of bytes in file */
> char di_addr[40]; /* disk block addresses */
> time_t di_atime; /* time last accessed */
> time_t di_mtime; /* time last modified */
> time_t di_ctime; /* time created */
> };
>
> ... although the v7 kernel sources does seem to update ctime when the
> inode metadata changes, regardless of what the coment in
> /usr/src/sys/h/ino.h might say.
>
> More interestingly, this comment seems to continue in newer versions
> up to 3BSD, and then the comments becomes "change time" in BSD 4.2,
> probably coincident with the File System Implementation?
>
> The best we can guess is that the change from "creation time" to
> "inode change time" happened sometime between 1979 and 1982. Does
> anyone who was around can give the story about how and when this
> happened?
>
> - Ted
>
--
---
Larry McVoy Retired to fishing
http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/boat