On 10.12.2011, at 13.03, Mark Zealey wrote: > Ah-ha it's doing the same in 2.0.16 - looking deeper it's because i havn't > accessed the tmp fields in a week or two so I guess the decision has been > taken not to migrate them.
Yes, most likely the reason. Could this also explain the date.saved? > It could well be because of the conversion to sdbox then - the ctime/mtime of > the files are not being preserved by dsync (in stock 2.0.16). The date.saved > timestamp is only put into the cache on the second dsync run; presumably > therefore it picks it up from the filesystem. With sdbox the file's mtime isn't even tried to be preserved. The received-time and saved-time are written to the metadata block inside the file.
