On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 10:10 AM, j. van den hoff <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 15:42:37 +0200, Richard Hipp <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 9:33 AM, j. van den hoff >> <[email protected]>**wrote: >> >> >>> I guess the problem might be related to `fossil' checking `mtime' with a >>> too low time resolution. is this possible? it is of course irrelevant for >>> interactive use but not so for scripts like this one. >>> >>> >> The default behavior is for Fossil to check both stat.st_mtime and >> > > so the time resolution here is 1 second, right? could that not be increased > (say to 1 ms or so)? No, at least not in a cross-platform way. Many filesystems do not store timestamps with a resolution higher than one second. (Bummer, I know, but 40 years ago when mtime was first invented, a one-second timestamp was high resolution for the hardware available!) -- D. Richard Hipp [email protected]
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
