On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 16:13:15 +0200, Richard Hipp <[email protected]> wrote:
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
I see. despite the fact that I did _not_ check the whole documentation
before asking the list: if
it is not already explained maybe you could put a remark somewhere to the
extent
that switching mtime checking off for scripting purposes might be a good
idea due
to the low time resolution?
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!)
although quartz clocks are about that old ;-)
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
