Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 15:21:38 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@ref.tfs.com> To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Cc: terry@lambert.org, current@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FS PATCHES: THE NEXT GENERATION Message-ID: <199602062321.PAA01295@ref.tfs.com> In-Reply-To: <199602062310.QAA03559@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at Feb 6, 96 04:10:54 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > the trouble with full files is it's TOO EASY to spam > > someone else's patches when you over-write the file. > > > > With Patches, you get a .rej file in this case so you can merge the two > > changes.. > > > > I think it might be an idea to supply your changes in that form.. that won't work, because if there are changes in the files that you checkout that were not in the versions you used to generate your new files, then those changes are effectively lost. > > Well, the idea is to do a fresh checkout and spam the checked out > files and then "cvs update" in case I did spam some changes. > Ah yes but: now that you have a sup+cvs setup, you can keep your diff sets up-to date relatively easily, and if you send them as diffs then there is a good chance that even if there is a time-lag induced collision, it will be caught and fixed, also many files get changes that are automatically resolved.. as long as you don't check in your changes in your cvs tree, it's much more resistant to spamming, to do it this way.. > I can provide the changes as diffs if you need them that way; I'll warn > you that you'll be in exactly the same boat applying them as the original > diff sets I sent (that's why I went to the trouble of sup + cvs + ...). err why? > > Will the local spam + "cvs diff" not work for you? >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199602062321.PAA01295>