-r branch tag:date

조회수 3회
읽지 않은 첫 메시지로 건너뛰기

John Muller

읽지 않음,
1999. 1. 26. 오전 3:00:0099. 1. 26.
받는사람
Hello,

The option "update -r (branch-tag):(date)" does not work.

Did it ever work?
If so when was it broken and is it planned to be fixed?
If not will CVS ever be enhanced to support it?

Is their a workaround that will provide the same functionality?

thanks
jsm

Dan Wilder

읽지 않음,
1999. 1. 26. 오전 3:00:0099. 1. 26.
받는사람
Just curious.

What leads you to the conclusion that there exists any
such option as "-r (branch-tag):(date)" ?

I must have missed something in the documentation.

--
Dan Wilder <d...@gasboy.com>


John Muller

읽지 않음,
1999. 1. 27. 오전 3:00:0099. 1. 27.
받는사람
> Just curious.
>
> What leads you to the conclusion that there exists any
> such option as "-r (branch-tag):(date)" ?

Tha FAQ.


Dan Wilder

읽지 않음,
1999. 1. 27. 오전 3:00:0099. 1. 27.
받는사람

Hmm. Stole a march on me. Yes, I see you're right, the thing
is once again maintained.

In the FAQ (1.10.4 source tree), line 858, there is exactly
one mention of this option.

A few lines later, in the same document:

[comment from the audience: You are dreaming..
this does not work.. try it, you get
No such tag: "MYTAG:May 1"
or similar. I wish it did because I need it. jul...@whistle.com]

What I do _not_ see is any mention in the man pages, the built-in
help, or the Cederqvist. Or the source, for that matter. Perhaps
you could point out what I'm missing in _those_ works?

Are you saying the FAQ is, or should be, more definitive, even where
it is equivocal, and where what it suggests doesn't work, than the
manuals?

--
Dan Wilder <d...@gasboy.com>


John Muller

읽지 않음,
1999. 1. 27. 오전 3:00:0099. 1. 27.
받는사람

> Are you saying the FAQ is, or should be, more definitive, even where
> it is equivocal, and where what it suggests doesn't work, than the
> manuals?

No. I was just asking if this option ever really existed or worked.

If it did work are their any plans to fix it so it works again. And if
it didn't is their another way to achieve the same functionality.

jsm


Dan Wilder

읽지 않음,
1999. 1. 27. 오전 3:00:0099. 1. 27.
받는사람
On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 02:10:48PM -0500, John Muller wrote:
>
> > Are you saying the FAQ is, or should be, more definitive, even where
> > it is equivocal, and where what it suggests doesn't work, than the
> > manuals?
>
> No. I was just asking if this option ever really existed or worked.

Um. Sorry, I think I mistook the tone of your original post.
It sounded pretty curt to me.

> If it did work are their any plans to fix it so it works again. And if
> it didn't is their another way to achieve the same functionality.
>
> jsm

Perhaps somebody else could speak to that.

I don't personally have any plans to fix (or implement) it.
Though it looks like I feature I could have used from time
to time ...

Perhaps somebody else has some such plans.

Please note that there are probably several folks on this list
who are willing to do contract work on CVS. This does not
include me. I'd be willing if I had any time, but time is
something in extremely short supply just now.

--
Dan Wilder <d...@gasboy.com>


Julian Elischer

읽지 않음,
1999. 1. 27. 오전 3:00:0099. 1. 27.
받는사람
In 1.9.?? -D and -r(branch) could be used together on a checkout.
I don't know about 1.10..

Dan Wilder

읽지 않음,
1999. 1. 27. 오전 3:00:0099. 1. 27.
받는사람
On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 01:21:04PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> In 1.9.?? -D and -r(branch) could be used together on a checkout.
> I don't know about 1.10..

Is this the same Julian whose humorous dissenting opinion appears in
the FAQ? Did the combination of -D and -r(branch) do what you
needed it to do?

Thanks, I'll try it in 1.10.4 and see if it does anything sensible.

--
Dan Wilder <d...@gasboy.com>


John Cavanaugh

읽지 않음,
1999. 2. 5. 오전 3:00:0099. 2. 5.
받는사람
On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 02:13:40AM +0000, Tony Lill wrote:
> >>>>> "Dan" == Dan Wilder <d...@gasboy.com> writes:

>
>
> Dan> On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 07:41:45AM -0500, John Muller wrote:
> >> > Just curious. > > What leads you to the conclusion that
> >> there exists any > such option as "-r (branch-tag):(date)" ?
> >>
> >> Tha FAQ.
>
> Dan> Hmm. Stole a march on me. Yes, I see you're right, the
> Dan> thing is once again maintained.
>
> Dan> In the FAQ (1.10.4 source tree), line 858, there is exactly
> Dan> one mention of this option.
>
> Dan> A few lines later, in the same document:
>
> Dan> [comment from the audience: You are dreaming.. this does
> Dan> not work.. try it, you get No such tag: "MYTAG:May 1" or
> Dan> similar. I wish it did because I need it. jul...@whistle.com]
>
> I didn't look in the FAQ, but the only place that syntax is mentioned
> in the man page is for the -j option.
>
> However....
>
> You can combine the -r and -D option successfully if you just delete
> the test that bitches and dies when you try. Mind you, I've only tried
> using that combo to tag stuff on the branch, and you should also be
> able to checkout. I'm not sure if they both become sticky, so you
> could hose yourself if you tried to do an unqualified update or a
> checkin on the results.

Someone just came and asked me about this topic and I did a little
digging.


If you combine the -r & -D options as follows:

aligator-cavanaug ~/wip/hped/share 2055% cvs up -r slash_hped -Dyesterday hped-root
U hped-root
aligator-cavanaug ~/wip/hped/share 2056% cvs status hped-root
===================================================================
File: hped-root Status: Needs Checkout

Working revision: 1.1.2.1
Repository revision: 1.1.2.2 /cvs/wlv/src/hped/share/Attic/hped-root,v
Sticky Tag: slash_hped (branch: 1.1.2)
Sticky Date: (none)
Sticky Options: (none)


So it looks like only the -r <option> remains as sticky. Which may
or may not be "correct" depending on your interpretation.


Using update -rbranch:date does not work.
Using update -jbranch:date does seem to work.


I guess I would propose that we get the -rbranch:date to work and
have it so it sets both the Sticky Tag & the Sticky Date.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
John Cavanaugh Hewlett-Packard Company
Project Engineer 1400 Fountaingrove Pkwy
EESof Division Santa Rosa, CA 95403-1799

Email: cava...@sr.hp.com Phone: 707-577-4780
707-577-3948 (Fax)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
One who is too insistent on his own views,
finds few to agree with him.
-- Japanese Proverb
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Julian Elischer

읽지 않음,
1999. 2. 8. 오전 3:00:0099. 2. 8.
받는사람
On the FreeBSD CVS
-D and -r{branch} can be used together in some operations.

On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Eivind Eklund wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 02:43:17PM -0500, John Muller wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > The option "update -r (branch-tag):(date)" does not work.
> >
> > Did it ever work?
> > If so when was it broken and is it planned to be fixed?
> > If not will CVS ever be enhanced to support it?
> >
> > Is their a workaround that will provide the same functionality?
>

> There is a couple of patches on the unofficial patches page; I wrote
> one, for instance. If it is to enter the official CVS tree, somebody
> will need to write regression tests for it. This may end up being me,
> but no guarantee - I have it and I use it, and it isn't really
> critical to me that it is in the official CVS (as I tend to need to
> patch CVS anyway). I may still fix it _someday_, but I haven't done
> so yet.
>
> Eivind.
>
>


Jim Kingdon

읽지 않음,
1999. 2. 8. 오전 3:00:0099. 2. 8.
받는사람
> There is a couple of patches on the unofficial patches page; I wrote
> one, for instance. If it is to enter the official CVS tree, somebody
> will need to write regression tests for it.

Right. There are also the issues of "-r tag -D date" versus "r
tag:date" and making this consistent across all commands. Not all
_that_ hard, and perhaps I'll get around to it some day (yeah right
:-(). But if someone else has time to work on it, so much the
better....


Eivind Eklund

읽지 않음,
1999. 2. 8. 오전 3:00:0099. 2. 8.
받는사람

The patches I submitted add '-rtag:date' support to all CVS commands.

Will these be committed if I supply correct regression tests that show
that they work?

Eivind.


Eivind Eklund

읽지 않음,
1999. 2. 8. 오전 3:00:0099. 2. 8.
받는사람
On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 02:43:17PM -0500, John Muller wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The option "update -r (branch-tag):(date)" does not work.
>
> Did it ever work?
> If so when was it broken and is it planned to be fixed?
> If not will CVS ever be enhanced to support it?
>
> Is their a workaround that will provide the same functionality?

There is a couple of patches on the unofficial patches page; I wrote


one, for instance. If it is to enter the official CVS tree, somebody

John Muller

읽지 않음,
1999. 2. 8. 오전 3:00:0099. 2. 8.
받는사람

Ok I see them. Thanks for the info.
jsm


Dan Wilder

읽지 않음,
1999. 2. 8. 오전 3:00:0099. 2. 8.
받는사람
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 05:54:00AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On the FreeBSD CVS
> -D and -r{branch} can be used together in some operations.
>

Is the FreeBSD CVS somehow different than the standard CVS?

--
Dan Wilder <d...@gasboy.com>


Dan Wilder

읽지 않음,
1999. 2. 8. 오전 3:00:0099. 2. 8.
받는사람
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 03:39:15PM +0100, Eivind Eklund wrote:

> The patches I submitted add '-rtag:date' support to all CVS commands.
>
> Will these be committed if I supply correct regression tests that show
> that they work?

I certainly can't speak for the maintainers.

However, '-rtag:date' updates for the manpages and the
Cederqvist would possibly make the package more attractive.

If you don't care to undertake these, and if the maintainers
indicate willingness to consider your '-rtag:date' patches,
I'd be willing to submit documentation updates.

It would help me if you (Eivind) would be willing to review
any such updates prior to their submission.

--
Dan Wilder <d...@gasboy.com>


Julian Elischer

읽지 않음,
1999. 2. 8. 오전 3:00:0099. 2. 8.
받는사람
I'm not sure if the patches that did that were back-ported by the CVS
crew.. we submitted them but I lost track of them, and haven't tried 1.10

I'm just being specific about what I know works as opposed to saying what
doesn't work..

julian

John Cavanaugh

읽지 않음,
1999. 2. 10. 오전 3:00:0099. 2. 10.
받는사람
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 03:39:15PM +0100, Eivind Eklund wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 09:35:51AM -0500, Jim Kingdon wrote:
> > > There is a couple of patches on the unofficial patches page; I wrote
> > > one, for instance. If it is to enter the official CVS tree, somebody
> > > will need to write regression tests for it.
> >
> > Right. There are also the issues of "-r tag -D date" versus "r
> > tag:date" and making this consistent across all commands. Not all
> > _that_ hard, and perhaps I'll get around to it some day (yeah right
> > :-(). But if someone else has time to work on it, so much the
> > better....
>
> The patches I submitted add '-rtag:date' support to all CVS commands.
>
> Will these be committed if I supply correct regression tests that show
> that they work?

How exactly do they work? Do they set *both* sticky tags? Or just the
branch?

What about "cvs update -r:date"? Does that update the date on the
current branch??


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
John Cavanaugh Hewlett-Packard Company
Project Engineer 1400 Fountaingrove Pkwy
EESof Division Santa Rosa, CA 95403-1799

Email: cava...@sr.hp.com Phone: 707-577-4780
707-577-3948 (Fax)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The engineer is a person who passes as an exacting expert on
the basis of being able to turn out with prolific fortitude infinite
strings of incomprehensible formulae calculated with micrometric
precision from vague assumptions that are based on debatable
figures taken from inconclusive experiments carried out with
instruments of problematical accuracy and doubtful reliability.
-- Unknown
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


전체답장
작성자에게 답장
전달
새 메시지 0개