how to force recalculation of sha1 for versioned file?
John Arbash Meinel
john at arbash-meinel.com
Mon Feb 11 17:48:21 GMT 2008
Vincent Ladeuil wrote:
>>>>>> "bialix" == Alexander Belchenko <bialix at ukr.net> writes:
> bialix> Aaron Bentley пишет:
> >> Alexander Belchenko wrote:
> >>> Unfortunately `bzr st` says that nothing changed. Because mount don't
> >>> change
> >>> timestamp nor size of this file.
> >>> It seems like this trick is fairly new, because back in November 2007
> >>> I'm working with the same branch and don't have such problems.
> >> No, this "trick" is not new. Bazaar has used the mtime as an indicator
> >> of whether a file has changed since bzr-0.0.5 in July 2005.
> bialix> So, let's assuming I have false memory.
> >>> I could understand this change should speed up status operation, but
> >>> it seems like in my case bzr does the wrong thing.
> >> If your disk image is being modified without having its mtime updated, I
> >> would argue that's the wrong thing. The mtime should always be updated
> >> when the contents of a file change.
> Imagine doing that for 8GB mounted images (as I mount regularly
> for virtual machines) !
> Otherwise, yes, it's disturbing that the mtime is not updated.
> I think they didn't want to impose a performance penalty by
> updating mtime each time time one of the files in the mounted
> volume was modified.
> bialix> Thank you. I will start to teach myself run `touch
> bialix> firmware.bin` after each `umount`.
> Only if md5 changes ! ;-)
Well, if you touch it, then Bazaar will go out and re-read it to check the sha
hash. And if it hasn't changed, then we will just update its last-known-valid mtime.
More information about the bazaar