i forgot to write the date/times (ignore the accessed .... getting
the date-property sets this to "now"):
test.txt in backup-dir:
cre: tue, 12. 11. 2002 17:27:54
mod: tue, 12. 11. 2002 17:27:54
acc: wed, 13. 11. 2002 20:17:25
test.txt in t2/, the working copy:
cre: wed, 13. 11. 2002 20:04:09
mod: tue, 13. 11. 2002 20:15:21
acc: wed, 13. 11. 2002 20:15:27
t2/test.txt (if it is overwritten with
the backup file):
cre: wed, 13. 11. 2002 20:04:09
mod: tue, 12. 11. 2002 17:27:54
acc: wed, 13. 11. 2002 20:16:25
and yes:
in windows, the modified time is reset, when the files contents gets
modified (which is not too bad actually). but if you copy a file over
another file, then there is the behaviour, that the creation date is
from the file, and the modified date is from the contents (so
creation can be newer than modified .... weird, eh?)
--- subversion@lclark.net wrote:
> HMMM, I have seen some weird behavior here, but I don't have time
> to explore
> all the variations til later today. I will post more info then.
>
> landon
>
> >-- Original Message --
> >To: subversion@lclark.net
> >Cc: dev@subversion.tigris.org
> >From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@collab.net>
> >Date: 12 Nov 2002 14:20:55 -0600
> >Subject: Re: svn status: does not notice changed file if
> timestamp of
> "new"
> >file is older
> >
> >
> >subversion@lclark.net writes:
> >
> >> As I understand it, Windows keeps three "dates" per file:
> >> Created Date, Modified Date, Accessed Date. I am a little
> confused by
> >your
> >> explanation since none of those dates should be equal to their
> counterpart
> >> dates in the textbase version.
> >
> >Subversion never looks at the textbase timestamp. It looks at the
> >timestamp recorded in the entries file, and compares it to the
> >timestamp on the working file.
> >
> >> (I checked to make sure that this is the case). Also, I went
> back
> >> to make sure that the WC version of the file file was
> substantively
> >> different than the textbase version just to make sure I wasn't
> doing
> >> anything dumb.
> >
> >Now you've managed to confuse me as well.
> >
> >Are you saying that you've managed to create this scenario?
> >
> > 1. a working file and its text-base file have different
> contents
> > 2. the working file has the exact same timestamp as is recorded
> in
> > the entries file.
> >
> >If so, how did this scenario happen?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
> >
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Nov 13 20:24:56 2002