Patrick Shanahan wrote on 2014-10-03 16:52 (UTC-0400):
Istvan Gabor wrote:
Of course if the camera clock is set incorrect both the exif time and file time stamp (the original one, not linux mounted) will be incorrect. But this has not to do anything with my problem.
I seem to recall windoz sets the file date to the last modification date in that particular directory. So moving/copying a file from one location to another, even renaming, alters the file time-stamp.
I don't remember anything like that. Maybe rather than "windoz" you mean Windows Explorer in DND mode? I used DOS and OS/2 many years before first use of Explorer, and as an OFM user, never really did use it much if I had an OFM option readily available. I really can't put my recollection on any instances of copying regular files where timestamps were not automatically preserved with DOS COPY, Norton Commander, FC/2, or newer OFMs for win95 & up. In fact, on FAT and HPFS, I was in the habit of using OFMs to change directory timestamps to match each other so that DIR listings would always show directories in alphabetical order even though files would be shown in order of whichever of time or alpha sort was being applied. I do have a problem with the notion that both creation and last modified both exist as distinct "regular" file attributes. Where at filesystem level can relevance lie for preserving creation when last modified is newer? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org