Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:28:44 -0500 From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag=2DErling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bristol.ac.uk> Subject: Re: still trouble with pci.c on i386 Message-ID: <d873d5be0912281428p1ff8302bo659041f66fd61ed5@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <86vdfr0yky.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <d873d5be0912201722v6269800bx989510d47ace1888@mail.gmail.com> <20091222174248.GA61700@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> <86ws072she.fsf@ds4.des.no> <200912281058.40733.jhb@freebsd.org> <86zl53105u.fsf@ds4.des.no> <d873d5be0912280937j20453254l38d54549af0784e3@mail.gmail.com> <86vdfr0yky.fsf@ds4.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Right, that's partly why I suggested Anton use svn. But, as John explained, he still finds cvs convenient for some purposes. b. On 12/28/09, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav <des@des.no> wrote: > "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> writes: >> I think John is referring to my first reply to Anton, early in the >> thread, in which I said that I thought it would be easier for Anton to >> get help for problems with -CURRENT by using svn revision numbers, >> because most base system developers were using that VCS. Apparently, >> John at least is not using svn exclusively, and is willing to look up >> cvs revision numbers. > > The problem is that CVS revision numbers are per-file, while Subversion > revision numbers are per-commit. A single Subversion commit that > affects twenty files will translate to twenty (file, revno) tuples that > must be rolled back individually, unless you can figure out a date (or > date range) that corresponds exactly to that commit and that commit > only. > > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d873d5be0912281428p1ff8302bo659041f66fd61ed5>