From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon May 21 11:30:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7468037B422 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:30:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: (from dan@localhost) by dan.emsphone.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f4LIUB319340; Mon, 21 May 2001 13:30:11 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dan) Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 13:30:11 -0500 From: Dan Nelson To: Wilko Bulte Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: -R for make update ? Message-ID: <20010521133011.A13782@dan.emsphone.com> References: <20010521194828.A789@freebie.demon.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.17i In-Reply-To: <20010521194828.A789@freebie.demon.nl>; from "Wilko Bulte" on Mon May 21 19:48:28 GMT 2001 X-OS: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In the last episode (May 21), Wilko Bulte said: > Is there any specific reason why one needs to be able to write a lock > to the CVS repo when running 'make update' to get a freshly checked > out source? > The Makefile.inc1 has: > > .if defined(CVS_UPDATE) > cd ${.CURDIR}; cvs -q update -A -P -d > .endif > > In other words, would adding '-R' hurt? If you are accessing a local CVS repo that you have updated via cvsup, no. But if you are accessing something on freefall directly, I think you need the locking just in case someone is committing at the same time. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@emsphone.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message