Hello Philip > > Instead of "why is the second change not reported" it should be "why > > is the first change reported". > > > > Relevant part of the script: > > At this point Subversion has recorded a timestamp for the file. > > > echo "2" > x > > touch -m -t "201212310000.00" x > > svn -q status <-- this change is detected by Subversion (why?) > > The recorded timestamp is not 201212310000.00 so it does not match the > file's timestamp and Subversion detects the change. > > > svn commit -m "" x > > Subversion records the current timestamp 201212310000.00. > > > echo "3" > x > > The file's timestamp is not 201212310000.00 so it does not match the > recorded timestamp and Subversion detects the change. > > > touch -m -t "201212310000.00" x > > svn -q status <-- this change is not detected by Subversion (as > expected) > > The recorded timestamp and the file's timestamp are both > 201212310000.00 > and Subversion does not detect the change.
Thank you for explaining what happens here! I falsely assumed that "svn status" looks for "newer than recorded" timestamps instead of "different than recorded" timestamps. So it of course makes sense that the first change is reported and the second is not. Regards, Peter.
