Re: concat task does no up-to-date checking

[Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>]

On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Martin Monsorno <mo...@gmx.de> wrote:

> It seems the concat tast does not compare the timestamps of the
> source and destination files.

True.

> This is bad, because the files are re-made in every build, and so
> the jars containing these files are re-made too, and so on.

But required in a different scenario (especially if you want to append
to a file).

What we'd need was an option to turn on/off the timestamp checks.
Want to file an enhancement request (and maybe provide a patch)?

Stefan

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: concat task does no up-to-date checking

[Steve Loughran <st...@iseran.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefan Bodewig" <bo...@apache.org>
To: <an...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 6:56 AM
Subject: Re: concat task does no up-to-date checking


> On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Martin Monsorno <mo...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > It seems the concat tast does not compare the timestamps of the
> > source and destination files.
>
> True.
>
> > This is bad, because the files are re-made in every build, and so
> > the jars containing these files are re-made too, and so on.
>
> But required in a different scenario (especially if you want to append
> to a file).
>
> What we'd need was an option to turn on/off the timestamp checks.
> Want to file an enhancement request (and maybe provide a patch)?

actually, what we really need is a tweak to copy so that it only copies
files to the dest if they are different from the ones arlready there. Then
you filter into one dir, and copy into another, with the copy being a noop
if nothing has changed.

the advantages of this approach are that many other tasks without good
dependency checking, and external apps can also be supported.


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>