Brian Huddleston writes:
>
> Compare the above to a timestamp which can fail if:
>
> 1) The edits are within the granularity of the time stamp.
CVS has code to ensure that that can't happen (it sleeps until the time
is later than the last timestamp).
> 2) The sys-admin (or any bozo with sudo shell access) diddles the system
> clock.
Anyone who sets the clock backwards is inviting disaster.
> 3) Daylight savings switchover (in most parts of the US).
Timestamps are in UTC on any sane system and thus unaffected by DST.
> 4) Automatic NTP correction of the system time (pretty common in the Unix
> server world).
> (Under Windows 2000 it is possible for all the machines in a given
> domain to periodically
> sync their clocks with the PDC).
NTP never sets the clock backwards (see 2, above).
> 5) touch -r (although that's a bit of a pathological case)
See 2, above.
> 6) Getting completely scrambled by a misbehaving samba servers. (Heh...no
> flames
> please. Just something I've seen happen.)
No comment.
> How often do these happen? I'd be willing to bet $50 that it is less often
> than a 128bit or 160bit
> digest routine duplicates. ;-)
I think you meant *more* often. And I agree, but they almost always
cause CVS to think that the file might have been changed when it wasn't,
which isn't a serious problem in most cases.
-Larry Jones
Things are never quite as scary when you've got a best friend. -- Calvin
