more dos switches not working (1 Viewer)

[conception_native_0123]

since my accent has been discovered, I will talk regularly....

I attached a txt that I am keeping notes on robocopy. what i'm looking to do is use the /XO switch and apply it to all files in all subdirs. but, when I run this code in a bat file...

robocopy c:\1 c:\2 /XO /E

....files with newer modified stamps in the following subdirs are not copied from their source subdirs to the target subdirs. can someone tell me why? thanks.

c:\1\a
c:\1\b
c:\1\c

here are some example files I have in the source dirs, the equivalent files in the target dirs, and all the stamps that they have in both subdirs that are skipped:

c:\1\a (5/14/2021 4:33am) => c:\2\a (5/4/2021 11:23am)
c:\1\b (5/13/2021 2:29pm) => c:\2\b (5/7/2021 4:00am)
c:\1\c (5/13/2021 2:29pm) => c:\2\c (2/14/2021 9:22am)

all the files in the "c:\1\..." subdirs should be copied, but they are not.

 

[Jon]

DOS was made my corporations which are inherently evil. Are you with the corporations or against them?

 

[conception_native_0123]

Are you with the corporations or against them?

i have agreement with doc man, jon. why is this question "productive"? ha ha ha. I am BOTH *with* and *against*. I am WITH them as a relevant source for the money society needs to survive. I am AGAINST them with regard to their greed, which always gets out of control whenever they garner any sort of growth spurt whatsoever. Especially if their customer base ends up being the ignorant masses.

does that answer you question jon?

 

[Jon]

Kind of like good and evil. Use both when it suits. Although does the good book not suggest to follow a righteous path?

 

[conception_native_0123]

Although does the good book not suggest to follow a righteous path?

no one uses both when it suits. or should, rather. but yet again, is this question productive? or are you goading?

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Because /XO is an "exclude" rather than "include" option, try using reversed logic and apply the /XN option (as an experiment.)

 

[conception_native_0123]

i might have to do that doc. i can't seem to find explicit answer so experiments might be all that i can do. i'll let you all know what i get. thanks. the reason i ask is because XO DOES work in some cases. remember my last thread? it got solved!

 

[The_Doc_Man]

The biggest problem is remembering that the /Xx options are EXCLUSIONS, not INCLUSIONS - so in some cases I would expect selection logic to be totally reversed.

 

[Jon]

or are you goading?

I'm behaving like a corporation.

 

[conception_native_0123]

I'm behaving like a corporation.

i seriously am doubting that jon.

 

[isladogs]

Just when it seemed to be safe to go back in the water....
I'm getting a serious case of deja vu...all over again.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Were you hoping for some vu ja de? The feeling that something is totally unfamiliar?

 

[isladogs]

Ha! I hadn't read any threads by this member until now but immediately the old patterns were visible. A quick trumpet blast of recognition

 

[conception_native_0123]

Were you hoping for some vu ja de? The feeling that something is totally unfamiliar?

he should have gotten a few emails from me even.

 

[NauticalGent]

Just when it seemed to be safe to go back in the water....
I'm getting a serious case of deja vu...all over again.

I miss the High Noon Moderator and the itchy finger he had on the hair-trigger-ban-button for situations just like these...

 

[NauticalGent]

A quick trumpet blast of recognition

A Butt-Trumpet to be exact....