From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed May 27 02:28:53 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA13110 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 27 May 1998 02:28:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ymris.ddm.on.ca (p9a.neon.sentex.ca [207.245.212.202]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA13094 for ; Wed, 27 May 1998 02:28:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dchapes@ddm.on.ca) Received: from squigy.ddm.on.ca (squigy.ddm.on.ca [209.47.139.138]) by ymris.ddm.on.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA05579 for ; Wed, 27 May 1998 05:28:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from dchapes@ymris.ddm.on.ca) From: Dave Chapeskie Received: (from dchapes@localhost) by squigy.ddm.on.ca (8.8.8/8.8.7) id FAA24038; Wed, 27 May 1998 05:28:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <19980527052806.41527@ddm.on.ca> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 05:28:06 -0400 To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Fwd: Intermediate (?) level CVS questions] Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG References: <356485A5.8022EEE2@san.rr.com> <19980526150409.30903@kublai.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89i In-Reply-To: <19980526150409.30903@kublai.com>; from Brian Cully on Tue, May 26, 1998 at 03:04:09PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, May 26, 1998 at 03:04:09PM -0400, Brian Cully wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 1998 at 12:51:01PM -0700, Studded wrote: > > However I think this point is moot because I figured that every > > time I cvsup'ed the cvs tree it would delete my changes, and I was > > correct in that when I tested. > > You cannot branch with CVSup. Even if you could convince cvs to check > the changes in, CVSup will happily clobber them when it's next run. This isn't entirely true. Last time I checked if you removed the "delete" option from your CVSup file, then CVSup only blows away your checkins with conflicting revisions. This means that if add a branch and commit to it, it is safe unless the real CVS tree is also branched at the same place. (And even this could be avoided if you modified your local CVS to take an option allowing you to specify a different starting branch number instead of 0, ie making a branch at 1.2 use rel 1.2.42.1 instead of 1.2.0.1). This used to be how I kept track of local FreeBSD changes at the last company I worked for. I would branch at RELENG_2_2_1_RELEASE with a branch name like LOCAL_2_2_1. Then when RELENG_2_2_2_RELEASE was made I'd make a new LOCAL_2_2_2 branch and merge in all changes between RELENG_2_2_1_RELEASE and LOCAL_2_2_1. (Where "LOCAL" was actually the name of the company I was at.) Although it took awhile for CVS to walk the entire tree branching everything, I only had to do it every release. > FWIW, I think Terry's also keen on CVSup branching, so you might be > able to convince John that it's worth his time to pursue. Indeed some sort of special handling for local branches with CVSup, or CVSuping into the vender branch would be really nice. -- Dave Chapeskie , DDM Consulting To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message