From owner-cvs-all Tue Jan 27 09:09:23 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA21940 for cvs-all-outgoing; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 09:09:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns.mt.sri.com (sri-gw.MT.net [206.127.105.141]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA21928 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 09:09:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nate@mt.sri.com) Received: from mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by ns.mt.sri.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA22146; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 10:08:37 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate@rocky.mt.sri.com) Received: by mt.sri.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA05462; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 10:08:36 -0700 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 10:08:36 -0700 Message-Id: <199801271708.KAA05462@mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Peter Wemm Cc: John Polstra , committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is this a new CVS bug? In-Reply-To: <199801271636.AAA15237@spinner.netplex.com.au> References: <199801271611.IAA17726@austin.polstra.com> <199801271636.AAA15237@spinner.netplex.com.au> X-Mailer: VM 6.29 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk ... > > As you can see, it bogusly checked out the brandelf files into my > > top-level directory. > > > > Is this a new bug, or was it already known? > > You ran this on freefall, yes? If so, then that's still the old cvs on > there, so it's not a new bug. :-) > > Whether or not this is a bug or feature depends on how you look at it. > cvs has (for a while) created a CVS/ directory in the top level directory > with a path to the module in question. Doing a 'cvs update -d -P' in the > top directory causes the exact effects that you describe. IMHO, it's a > bloody pest and in my book it's a bug. Amen. Preach it brother. Go for it. Let 'er rip. > Creating CVS/Root is fine for the > top directory, but causes more trouble than it's worth. No kidding. I tried to have this fixed, but the Cyclic boys didn't agree until recently, so there may be a chance of it getting fixed. (Many of the CVS tests rely on that feature now). And, for what it's worth, I don't know of anyone except the original author who likes the new feature which is undocumented. :( Nate