From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 22 00:27:40 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49A9916A4CE; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 00:27:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from nagual.pp.ru (pobrecita.freebsd.ru [194.87.13.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 899BE43D54; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 00:27:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ache@pobrecita.freebsd.ru) Received: from pobrecita.freebsd.ru (ache@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nagual.pp.ru (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id i9M0Rbk1083258; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 04:27:37 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from ache@pobrecita.freebsd.ru) Received: (from ache@localhost) by pobrecita.freebsd.ru (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id i9M0RbKs083248; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 04:27:37 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from ache) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 04:27:35 +0400 From: Andrey Chernov To: Giorgos Keramidas Message-ID: <20041022002734.GB82964@nagual.pp.ru> Mail-Followup-To: Andrey Chernov , Giorgos Keramidas , David O'Brien , Ian FREISLICH , freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20041021085653.GA67949@nagual.pp.ru> <20041021093306.GA68546@nagual.pp.ru> <20041021190115.GC37500@dragon.nuxi.com> <20041021231013.GA79336@nagual.pp.ru> <20041022001859.GA22896@gothmog.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041022001859.GA22896@gothmog.gr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir Milter (version: 1.1; AVE: 6.28.0.7; VDF: 6.28.0.30; host: pobrecita.freebsd.ru) cc: Ian FREISLICH cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] libreadline buildworld breakage. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 00:27:40 -0000 On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 03:18:59AM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > Step 2) seems weird. It's probably because of the `branch: 1.1.1;' line > in the RCS header of the complete.c,v file. Has this been added > manually to force complete.c back into the vendor branch? As I already mention, there was some CVS surgery happens before to return files to the vendor branch, which was backed out later by peter, but apparently still hits. > modifies it, a conflict might not show up but a cvs update -j VENDOR and > a subsequent commit might still be required to pull up changes from the > vendor branch into HEAD. Some of those changes might not conflict with Of course, I do cvs update -j VENDOR, but its merge is equal to conflicts shown, i.e. single file readline.h -- Andrey Chernov | http://ache.pp.ru/