Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 15, 2005 at 06:27:38PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: >> >>I am not completely convinced that the bug is not in cvs-upgrade. In >>older versions, there was a script cvs-co-upgrade (today it's still in >>/usr/share/doc) that generated a list of "cvs add <file>" and "cvs >>remove <file>" commands, to be applied to a checked out working copy. >> >>This script is no longer recommended - doesn't that mean that >>cvs-upgrade now does something like this on itself? > > What does the output of cvs-upgrade look like in this situation? I > must admit, I've never used cvs-buildpackage to know exactly how it > works....
Well, the output of the current version is in the links I posted. The output of the old cvs-co-upgrade script looked like this: Version test passed build_list /home/frank/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_2.0.2.orig.tar.gz > tetex-bin_2.0.2.orig.list.6872 build_list /home/frank/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_2.99.3.20041109-beta.orig.tar.gz > tetex-bin_2.99.3.20041109-beta.o rig.list.6872 cvs add PROBLEMS-teTeX-2.0 cvs delete -fR config/ltconfig cvs delete -fR config/ltmain.sh cvs add fixes/flex-2.5.31-req-720976.patch cvs add libs/gd/COPYING cvs add libs/gd/Makefile.in cvs add libs/gd/README.TXT and the cvs commands are meant to be executed (I think the first three lines went to stderr and where redirected into the logfile by me). But after a look at the cvs-upgrade script I must say that Manoj seems to be right: It does nothing but figure out versions to use for tag names, unpack the source, do some sanity checks, change into the new source dir and do cvs $CVS_QUIET import ${importsubstmode} \ -m"Imported upstream version $upstream_version. $changes" \ "${cvsmodule}" source-dist "${cvs_upstream_tag}" where $CVS_QUIET is either empty or -Q, and ${importsubstmode} is usuall "-ko -d". I'm not sure about the original purpose of cvs-co-upgrade, the relevant changelog entry only says: * Since we fixed Bug#154365 in version 4.00, the watchdog script cvs-co-upgrade, has become unnecessary (since we do not miss files on upgrading, we do not need to check for missing files). and the referred bug was only a documentation bug; a problematic cvs command line was recommended for merging the new upstream sources into the workdir. An example of a file added to the trunk while it should have been only on the experimental branch is http://cvs.debian.org/tetex-base/metapost/support/Attic/trfonts.map?graph=1.2&cvsroot=tetex&hideattic=0 Have I done anything wrong during the cvs upgrade -j.. -j..? Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer