On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 02:12:45PM -0000, Max Bowsher wrote:
> jw schultz wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 12:09:14PM +0100, Lapo Luchini wrote:
> >> Would "creating a file in the same dir" be "too invasive"?
> >> Of course this would only solve the problem if one file is
> >> created/tested "per directory"...
> >> I guess cygwin HAS a call to examine the mount table and to try
> >> directly "one file per mount", but the root of the mount could be
> >> non writeable. Mhh. Not so easy as a patch as I first thought.
> >
> > I don't think creating a file on the receiver would be too
> > invasive.
>
> But wouldn't you have to do it on the sender as well?
No. The time comparisons are done on the reciever and only
the FAT receivers will be rounding down the timestamps.
So the first time you move the file from a non-FAT to a FAT
it will be rounded on the FAT fs and stay that way.
> > Just clunky.
>
> Even clunkier that defaulting modify-window to 1.
I did say i don't like the hack.
And as a side note the file->mtime & 1 part is an error
since the rounding is in HH:MM:SS localtime which will be
impacted by leap-seconds in the YMD:HMS<->unixtime conversion.
I'd rather we default modify-window to 1 for windows.
> Can't we just put a big warning in the man page / README?
Last minute manpage changes were made for 2.5.6 when Dave
backed out the window defaulting. See --modify-window
and BUGS.
--
________________________________________________________________
J.W. Schultz Pegasystems Technologies
email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remember Cernan and Schmitt
--
To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
