tisdag 24 juli 2007 skrev Junio C Hamano: > > Here CVS sleeps. The amount varies between invocations since it > > only sleeps enough for the seconds to wrap. > > Makes one wonder what it would do if you are on a filesystem > with coarser-than-a-second timestamp resolution. Like fat, but then the last test fails on FAT, which wasn't the case. Any other reasonable file systems that comes to your mind? Jason, could you provide us with some more information on OS, fs, cvs version etc. Whether timestamp granularity is larger than a second or not can be checked with this line, I think: touch a && ls --full-time a && sleep 1 && touch a && ls --full-time a Sample output where the timestamps are roughly one second apart. -rw-r--r-- 1 me me 0 2007-07-24 14:15:47.330927250 +0200 a -rw-r--r-- 1 me me 0 2007-07-24 14:15:48.338990250 +0200 a -- robin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
