Greg Thomas said:
>>
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 14:36:24 +0100, "Andrew Webb"
<andrew.microi@gmail.com> wrote:
>As Steve Fairhead says in a recent, related thread: "one could argue
>just as hard for timestamps to be preserved *because* of makefiles".
You could try, but I don't think you would be very successful. If you
preserve modification times, you fall in to the following trap:
1-Aug: Alice checks out file foo.c, modification date 1-Aug.
2-Aug: Bob modifies, commits foo.c
3-Aug: Alice does a make. foo.c is compiled,
creating foo.o timestamped 3-aug.
4-Aug: Alice does a 'svn update'. foo.c arrives timestamped 2-Aug
Alice does a make. foo.c is not compiled, despite being
changed since the last compilation, as foo.c is timestamped
2-Aug (when Bob made the change), which is before foo.o was
created (3-Aug).
<<
This is fairly bogus. So Alice has edited a file, thrown it away, and
reverted to an earlier version. With or without a VCS, this is (as I said
earlier in another post) the sort of situation that breaks makefiles anyway.
I'd do a make clean.
Steve
http://www.sfdesign.co.uk
http://www.fivetrees.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Aug 29 18:42:44 2006