X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: Eric Blake Subject: Re: coreutils 6.10-2, cygwin 1.5.25-15, cp -af loss of precision in timestamp Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:59:03 +0000 (UTC) Lines: 41 Message-ID: References: <4B1EABEF DOT 70206 AT qualcomm DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Rob Walker qualcomm.com> writes: > > I've found that cp -af doesn't preserve the least significant bits of > the "Modify" field of a file time. Yep. And the same goes for Linux prior to the introduction of the utimensat API. The fix is to upgrade to cygwin 1.7. Another caveat: any application that doesn't treat all files occurring with timestamps within the same 20 millisecond window as the same timestamp are doomed to portability problems on various filesystem/OS combinations; see this thread on gnulib: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2009-10/msg00140.html > > Ending up with a file with a time stamp of the above fine-grained form > is somewhat rare, I had to write a short Windows program to induce it. Depends on your machine, actually. On my work machine, I get a non-zero digit in the 10^-7 position for 95% of the files I create. On my home machine cygwin installation, ALL of my files are have a 0 in that position (ie. true multiples of 1 microsecond or greater). It is all based on the granularity of your system clock interrupts, which in turn depends on your mother board. Also, Windows itself does not permit resolution finer than 100ns, even though some filesystems do (like ext3 on Linux). However, there is still one pending timestamp granularity issue with no known patch, where time can STILL appear to go backward when using utimensat, because cygwin is using a different hi-res clock than windows: http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-developers/2009-10/msg00209.html And on the other end of the spectrum - don't try 'sleep 50d' unless you like 100% CPU utilization; the patch has been posted, but deferred until after cygwin 1.7.1: http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2009-q4/msg00178.html -- Eric Blake -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple