From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 28 22:28:51 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51A42106566C; Mon, 28 Dec 2009 22:28:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bf1783@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-ew0-f226.google.com (mail-ew0-f226.google.com [209.85.219.226]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6678FC17; Mon, 28 Dec 2009 22:28:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy26 with SMTP id 26so7816767ewy.3 for ; Mon, 28 Dec 2009 14:28:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=JiSVukTciO7HugUdKeM1PCPg+B9Zr1pHnlQMSa6Cka0=; b=NYKhNTAQ+bH3S1cCTVy97bXbH17++B7fYffO6RI3eNaQALEbti+3NBMxI0qhVsQ7K1 7jKsPqMG/IetqLtqK37dSTqhk6JRl85GmRO4qoNyVnUi8fOjxmBLL7wlJaSV67h9z/Sm LCVnzrT4m/8WMUBj5LdBdFTm+MMeZPLkWSz4Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=B2D+lw9xfNK/Va87JPqpg7RcURdOvBt/fdtO8ZHYkYksmylbUI+CVhT+LtLGUqBrtx J3qwM0QS6HzXHKhz9m8Q10z7gPm7e+uTYzG/231JU2m17XkQnhp1eb1CYqSXJ0F3hSoY /OcQrxdX+yqO6R16+deZSbvitkC0fT7PUKkIY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.90.135 with SMTP id e7mr5746302wef.34.1262039324554; Mon, 28 Dec 2009 14:28:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <86vdfr0yky.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <20091222174248.GA61700@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> <86ws072she.fsf@ds4.des.no> <200912281058.40733.jhb@freebsd.org> <86zl53105u.fsf@ds4.des.no> <86vdfr0yky.fsf@ds4.des.no> Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:28:44 -0500 Message-ID: From: "b. f." To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag=2DErling_Sm=F8rgrav?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Anton Shterenlikht Subject: Re: still trouble with pci.c on i386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 22:28:51 -0000 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 wrote: > "b. f." 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 >