Hi, I was surprised that better-adb-sync does not preserve the "second" part of the modification timestamp (a.k.a. mtime) when syncing files from Android to an external storage. Here is an example of the stat output on a file which was supposed to have mtime = 2022-03-07 12:21:13.504455586 -0500.
On a local Windows computer (NTFS partition):
$ stat VID-20191119-WA0005.mp4
File: VID-20191119-WA0005.mp4
Size: 19431 Blocks: 40 IO Block: 4096 regular file
Device: 842h/2114d Inode: 89002726 Links: 1
Access: (0644/-rw-r--r--) Uid: ( 1000/ wirawan) Gid: ( 1000/ wirawan)
Access: 2022-06-13 00:22:06.832821569 -0400
Modify: 2022-03-07 12:21:00.000000000 -0500
Change: 2022-04-07 20:27:28.135417353 -0400
Birth: -
On the Android device, the actual mtime was 2022-03-07 12:21:13.504455586 -0500 , and on an NTFS disk (the file was pulled from the Android phone into the disk using adb pull), the mtime became 2022-03-07 17:21:13.000000000 -0500.
I found from the source code snippet shown on bug #24 (#24) that this problem was apparently created "by design", since the timeformat string (for use with strftime) did not include the seconds. Could this be fixed? I'd rather have a timestamp accurate down to the second level; perhaps Windows/NTFS does not support more resolution than that.
Hi, I was surprised that better-adb-sync does not preserve the "second" part of the modification timestamp (a.k.a. mtime) when syncing files from Android to an external storage. Here is an example of the
statoutput on a file which was supposed to have mtime =2022-03-07 12:21:13.504455586 -0500.On a local Windows computer (NTFS partition):
On the Android device, the actual mtime was
2022-03-07 12:21:13.504455586 -0500, and on an NTFS disk (the file was pulled from the Android phone into the disk usingadb pull), the mtime became2022-03-07 17:21:13.000000000 -0500.I found from the source code snippet shown on bug #24 (#24) that this problem was apparently created "by design", since the timeformat string (for use with
strftime) did not include the seconds. Could this be fixed? I'd rather have a timestamp accurate down to the second level; perhaps Windows/NTFS does not support more resolution than that.