[<<]Message[>>]    [<<]Author[>>]    [<<]Subject[>>]    [<<]Thread[>>]

Number   :  228
Date     :  2001-06-17
Author   :  Kan Yabumoto
Subject  :  Re: directory date preservation
Size(KB) :  1



The directory you are creating as the replica of the source (in your
case, abc), is a directory that you are creating out of the blue
(the fact you gave a different name to the directory is a perfect
proof of this point). Therefore, we feel it is appropriate that the
current date be given to the directory. If you do not follow this
principle, you will lose the purpose and the reason of having a
timestamp to the directory altogether. This is true even when you
give the same name to the directory. We chose this behavior as being
compatible to Microsoft's XCOPY and ROBOCOPY (correct me if I'm wrong0.

The 2nd point about /RCY which reports the exit code of 100 is apparently
a bug. We will look into it.

Kan Yabumoto

=============================================================================
At 2001-06-17 16:51, Joseph Maddison wrote:

>I'm testing the directory date preservation in v. 2.56.2 XXCOPY. It keeps
>the dates for the subdir's, but it makes the top level directory dated with
>the current date. For example, running under Win2000:
>
>XXCOPY.EXE /h/i/s/e/nx/yy/rcy/nx0/q3 c:\xyz abc
>would create a new directory abc with a date of today, instead of taking
>the date from xyz. The sub directories appear to be dated correctly.
>
>Also, I was wondering why does a move operation (/rcy) always end in status
>100, no files to copy?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Joseph Maddison



This message if part of XXCOPY's message Archive.
The archive contains all the messages posted at Yahoo!Groups: XXCOPY.