ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <>
Subject Re: timestamp checking
Date Thu, 22 Apr 2004 08:39:11 GMT
Matt Benson wrote:
> --- Steve Loughran <> wrote:
>>I am thinking we can and should factor out all
>>timestamp checking into 
>>one place, like FileUtils and FileSet.
> +1
>>Incidentally, on that granularity discussion
>>yesterday. There is a 
>>platform independent way to determine this:
>>experimentation. Just set 
>>the timestamp of a file repeatedly to work out the
>>minimum acceptable 
>>granularity for setLastModified() getLastModified().
> Where would you suggest doing this?  in
>  This might give us a reasonable
> default for the execution box, but if granularity is
> truly per filesystem, it kind of leaves us in a
> position from which I can't see any attractive
> options.  I don't think we should be touching files
> all over every accessible filesystem just to determine
> granularity per file, though I don't really think
> that's what you were proposing.  Again, CHKNTFS can
> tell you per local root on NT/2K/XP whether you're
> dealing with an NTFS volume, but as most people
> probably don't have more than a couple that of dubious
> value as well...

You'd have to do a task <getfilesystemgranulary dir="test-dir" />

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message