In article <1i5zymk.7t6ex411rv5njN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>,
%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

Gawdamighty, you brits _have_ had your arseholes seriously reamed
haven't you? Sad little inconsequential island off the coast of Europe,
with its own monopoly play money and all.
--
W. Oates

Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

0/10 failed to mention that you saved our regretful donkeys in WWII.

Rick Merrill <rick0.merrill@NOSPAM.gmail.com> wrote:

On the Mac, "man touch" is all you need, on the PC see:

http://www.codeproject.com/tools/touch_win.asp

Although I've no idea why you would want to rely on filestamps rather
than EXIF data.

In article <1i63j2k.mbr7ra103j0j9N%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>,
%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

True, I forgot about the "greatest generation" and the bloody beaches of
Normandy and "the Few" and all that ("nonsense my lad, there's far too
many already"). Twice though, saved your sorry arses, don't forget the
Great War.
--
W. Oates

Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

Oh indeed, the one where the USA sent over a comedy act to entertain the
troops by running into a creeping barrage. BTW, should we save up and
buy you lot a clock so that you can turn up on time for something?

In Message-ID:<1i63pom.whl9u53ea74rN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>,
%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

No need. The point of this thread has to do with changing
the timestamp of something afterwards. That's a topic that some
of us are interested in, and that is relevant to this newsgroup.
Remember where you are?

If you and Mr. Oates can't bring computer timestamps (or at
least computers) into your potshots at each other, perhaps you can
take it offline and leave the rest of us in peace. I'd really
like not to killfile you, since you did add some useful content to
this thread.

--
Arthur T. - ar23hur "at" intergate "dot" com
Looking for a z/OS (IBM mainframe) systems programmer position

Rick Merrill wrote:


Hm...? The date of a JPG file should never reflect the time you made that
picture, but rather when you copied it to the current storage media. The
date of the picture itself should be stored as metadata inside the file,
f.e. as IPCT, EXIF or XMP microformat.

In article <5nl1qiFiqte4U2@mid.dfncis.de>, Sebastian G.
<seppi@seppig.de> wrote:

copying a file does not change the time stamp of a file. if it does,
that's a huge bug.

it is stored as metadata. however, it is also handy to have the date
of the file match so that sorting in a file browser is consistent.

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 23:32:19 +0100, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth)
wrote:

PMSL! You couldn't find your arsehole with the aid of a map, you useless
cunt.

nospam wrote:
Just to clarify. The time stamp of the original file won't change, but
the copy will have a new time stamp reflecting when it was created.

In article <ff4l11$ft7$1@dux.dundee.ac.uk>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:

then it is not an exact copy, and therefore a bug.

In article <ff4l11$ft7$1@dux.dundee.ac.uk>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:


Or just turn on the "skulduggery" switch (Prefs: date and time)

nemo_outis <abc@xyz.com> wrote:

Yup. And by applying my powers of intelligence and deduction, coupled
with my many years experience of people and the things they do, I am in
a position to draw the conclusions I have stated.

Erm, nope, none of that.

I read, smelt what the bugger was up to, and said nothing at all until
someone else had made remarks which indicated that he's smelt what I'd
smelt. And then I made mild comment, which made you decide to leap in
to cause an argument because you're a nasty little troll.

You're all worthless scum - worthless, that is, until you've been
composted down and used to grow something worthwhile like cattle feed.

Obviously you are so stupid you do not understand anything about people
or you would not be making such ridiculous and irrelevant points. Any
fule kno I speaketh the truth about the OP, for reasons which are far
too obvious to mention here. Any any fule kno I did not say what you
claim - after all, you're a troll, so almost all your claims are lies.

Of course, being a good troll, you will pay no attention to any of this,
but I thought I might as well point out the utter logical and moral
worthlessness of your position.

Ah, another troll making lunatic and baseless assertions. Utter
nonsense, these claims of yours, and nothing but your own malicious
invention.

We all know you trolls are liars and fantasists.

I'm typing this purely for my own entertainment, btw.

[snip]

That does indeed appear to be how you operate.

Rowland.

--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@dog.physics.org
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

Only a fool like you would try to elevate persistence in error, wild
speculation, and unjustified and rash conclusions, into logical principles.

You are a fool, and since you are clearly irrevocably and incorrigibly
committed to remaining one, it is pointless to do anything other than
occasionally draw others' attention to your stupidity lest they be misled.

Swat!

In
Message-ID:<1i685h3.14l9p5kwnb92uN%real-address-in-sig@flur.bltigibbet>,
real-address-in-sig@flur.bltigibbet (Rowland McDonnell) wrote:

That's true either now, or pretty soon.

Plonk.