Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 10:22:30 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: CVS ISSUES Message-ID: <199602081722.KAA10458@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <199602072019.NAA06210@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <199602072019.NAA06210@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Julian Elisher has noted some issues and I have tracked their source > to an (apparent) bug in CVS. > > > 1) SUP the main CVS tree > 2) Checkout a source tree > 3) Modify a file > 4) The same file is modified by another person in the > real source tree > 5) SUP update the local source tree copy.x > 6) CVS merge > 7) Changes in step #4 are apparently backed out in the merge I've *never* had the problem on my box, and I'm using heavily hacked sources on my box. Everytime I make changes, I do *exactly* the same things above, and my changes are always kept current, although at times I must go in and fix conflicts when my changes are either made to the tree or someone else makes changes to similar areas. > This isn't a problem if you always check in your modifications to > the main line tree, only if you are running a SUP update automatically > instead of manually. I'm not chekcing in my modifications to the tree, and I run SUP. automatically, (although that is irrelevant) > Why wasn't the diff against the version at the time of checkout > used to generate the patches applied to the current version (*NOT* > the version at the time of checkout, but a later version), and > that diff applied against the later (current via SUP) version? Hmm, I *think* I understand what you are trying to say in that incredibly run on sentence. If you meant to say. Why doesn't CVS keep the changes you've made current to the newly modified files, then I don't understand your problems. > I think that CVS is not paying as much attention to the checked out > tree as it should, specifically in light of "proiscuous" changes to > the CVS tree vs. SUP. > > Opinions? I hate to say this, but I think something is either wrong with the way you use CVS, or that you're hacked version of CVS is broken, since every version of CVS I've used in FreeBSD has always worked (and continues to work) in the way you are describing it's broken. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199602081722.KAA10458>