> Well it seems to be something to do with the timestamps by the "is > newer". Maybe it is some 'feature' of the filesystem that is on the > destination drive, is it mounted with any unusual options? But I don't > really understand how mv inside the same filesystem as when you > corrected the directory placement will mess with the timestamp. > > Maybe try: > > mv data/Baptism/DSC00681.JPG data > mv data/DSC00681.JPG data/Baptism > > and then see if the rsync suddenly believes it needs copying again... at > least you prove it is some feature of the mv action that changes the > file state somehow. Well, I'm still not sure what's going on, but here's what I did. I deleted all the files out of one of the directories. Then I did: cp -v --preserve=timestamp of the files. Then I ran rsync on those two directories and it said everything was uptodate. The I did some mv's and it still say they are uptodate. I have no idea. I guess I'll just rsync or cp using preserve and I should be good to go. Thanks for the help. James
