Re: svn status: does not notice changed file if timestamp of "new" file is older

Hi.

Maybe I am way off, but...

On Tue 2002-11-12 at 13:51:07 -0600, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> subversion@lclark.net writes:
>
> > Hi,
> > I have been using SVN internally for a few months. Here is a recipe for
> > reproducing this error:
> >
> > 1. I already have a WC in WC1 with a file called browse.html with a modified
> > date of 11/8/2002.
> > 2. Check out a fresh working copy in another directory: WC2. This gives
> > all the files a modified date of 11/12/2002.
> > 3. Copy browse.html from WC1 to WC2. The modified date stays the
> > same (11/8/2002).
>
> Well, heck, that's the bogosity right there. Is that normal on win32?
> When you copy a file, the timestamp doesn't change?? I've never heard
> of such a thing.
>
> > 4. svn st and svn st -u both return no changes to WC2.
> >
>
> Right. The first check we make is whether the timestamp has changed.
> If the timestamp hasn't changed,

The timestamp has changed from the point of view of WC2. It may be
true that, for the copied file, the timestamp stayed the same
(11/8/2002).

But before the copy, WC2/browse.html was of 11/12/2002, afterwards it
is 11/8/2002. So no, the timestamp has changed with regard to WC2.

> svn assumes it couldn't *possibly* be modified. (If the timestamp
> has changed, then svn resorts to file-size and possibly
> brute-force.) This is exactly what CVS does as well.

Maybe WC1/browse.html and WC2/browse.html are simply the same
binary-wise?

Regards,

        Benjamin.