Re: file modifications get lost due to FAT 2s time resolution

On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 12:46:36PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote:
> I have to say that I do not quite understand why this even falls into the
> category of a bug. It seems like the circumstances that would trigger it
> would almost have to be intentional, at which point, if the person really
> had a desire to do what they are doing, all they have to do is make their
> script sleep. I do not see the real world case where someone would run
> into this bug.

I agree for the most part. I suppose someone might be able to trigger
this unintentionally. But it would be a highly unusual case.

> Along that same line of reasoning, I do not understand why the current
> code attempts to "sleep" in the first place. If that code is only there
> to handle this kind of edge case, why even have it all?

I think the sleep was a poor choice now. But it's the same thing that
CVS does and I suspect nobody had a beter solution at the time.

-- 
Ben Reser <ben@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org