Mike Castle wrote:
> Is there EVER a good reason to really override -kb?
>
> I have at times wished that -k options didn't override -kb. I wanted to
> do something on most files, without having to go back and special case
> binary files.
I think the issue is that -kb is treated like all the other keyword
expansion modes as far as overriding is concerned. I haven't analyzed how
much work it would take to special case it.
> Perhaps a new -k options, say -kB, to indicate binary that is NOT
> overridden by other -k options should be worked on.
This does seem to make sense in a useful sort of way. It would solve some
of the problems associated with using merge with '-kk' as well (see
http://cvshome.org/docs/manual/cvs_5.html#IDX262 ). As long as you made
sure you only forbid overriding the mode in commit, export, and update,
(i.e. not for 'admin -k') I don't foresee any problems.
Derek
--
Derek Price CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org )
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenAvenue ( http://OpenAvenue.com )
--
Disneyland: A people trap operated by a mouse
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
