Modified file Stamp changing by 1 sec??
rpivato at cpovo.net
Wed Aug 25 17:20:23 GMT 2004
The time resolution is related to the filesystem not just the OS (FAT32 vs
NT 4 can handle 1 sec of granularity (due to NTFS). Windows 9x can not (no
odd second due to FAT32).
I am not sure about *nix systems.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Watson" <jtwatson at linux-consulting.us>
To: <smb-clients at lists.samba.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: Modified file Stamp changing by 1 sec??
> Yes I am going from Windows to Linux. I think this NT 4.0 box does have a
> file resolution better then 2 seconds, but I will have to check this.
> Joseph Watson
> On Wednesday August 25 2004 11:35 am, Arne Henningsen wrote:
> > Hi,
> > when I was backing up files from Linux to Windows I had the same
> > was because (some / all ???) Windows file systems have a file time
> > resolutions of 2 seconds. Thus, if the file time on Unix was, e.g. 7:17,
> > had to be on Windows 7:16 or 7:18, and thus there was quite often a 1
> > difference. However, you copied the files in the opposite direction,
> > you? Maybe you can figure out, if this is also the reason for your
> > All the best,
> > Arne
> > On Wednesday 25 August 2004 17:20, Joseph Watson wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I had a tap drive fail on my NT 4.0 server, so as a temperatry fix I
> > > smbmnt to mount the NT share on my linux box. Then I used Kdar to
> > > the files. This worked fine, it took 24 hours to backup 30 Gigs. The
> > > day I did a incramentle backup, and it was 3.6 Gigs. So I started
> > > at what was changed and descovered that 90% of the backup are files
> > > the modified date was changed by 1 sec. But the dates are sever
> > > years on the past. It is clear to me these files did not change, but
> > > the date moved forward by 1 second. I check the properties on the NT
> > > server and the linux box for some of these files, and they show the
> > > date. But the full backup shows they were a second older the day
> > >
> > > Has anyone seen this kind of thing before? I don't know if the
> > > with NT, smbmnt or Dar, so I thought I might ask.
More information about the smb-clients