On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Erik Huelsmann wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Note to self. Be really careful with 'cp -p' and 'tar xpf' when working
>>> in a view.
>>
>> We don't have views, but yes, that's true. The problem has been
>> reduced in 1.5 by taking the file size into account too.
>
> On Linux/unix you should consider ctime too since it is much harder for it
> to be backdated compared to an actual file change. In fact, even trying to
> backdate the mtime will cause ctime to be updated to the current time. Of
> course it will get updated on the pristine file as well if you move the
> whole tree, but any mismatch (ctime, mtime, or length) could trigger the
> content check.
I think we've been through this and the contrived scenario of your
other mail before. Length has become one of the criteria in 1.5. ctime
can't be added.
I think the subversion developers have agreed that any method other
than complete content checks will not be bullet proof. However we
decided for a trade off between speed and thoroughness which means we
don't do complete content checks unless we have reasonable chance of
finding a changed file.
Regards,
Erik.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-06-11 19:39:10 CEST