On Sep 11, 2008, at 10:39 AM, Ittay Dror wrote:
Quite the opposite, YOU told cvs (via -kb) not to change the file,
and it obeyed, i.e., you added the file with -kb and then
committed it from MS, and on MS the file contained "/bin/bash^M",
and because of the -kb, cvs on Linux gave you EXACTLY the file
committed on the MS machine which contains "/bin/bash^M"
what happened is this:
- there was no -kb
- a developer checks out the source tree and works with it, making
some changes to .c files
- not touching the file in question. the file is a startup script
for a daemon
- the build is ok on windows, so now he wants to check it is ok on
linux
- we don't want him to commit in order to test.
- so, he mounts the source tree from a linux machine and runs the
build
- this copies the file to the output of the build
- he wants to test the daemon, so he runs the startup script (the
file in question)
--> this fails. the file was checked out in windows, so now it has ^M
This sounds to me like it's not a CVS problem at all. The checkout
to the Windows machine has the correct line endings for the
platform. But then the sandbox is mounted from a different
architecture using different line-ending conventions, the text files
are interpreted as-is, and they break. It's unreasonable to assume
that such an arrangement will work at all because the tools on the
different platforms just don't interoperate well in this way (and
rightly so).
The build on the Linux box should account for line endings if the
source tree is mounted from Windows. Or the method used to copy the
source tree from Windows to Linux could do the translation. Or you
could check out on Linux and mount the Linux sandbox on Windows for
testing, if Windows is more forgiving than Linux with regard to line
endings. Or you could commit to a work branch and let CVS do the
conversion while checking out into a second sandbox on Linux, and
merge back to the parent branch after testing. Or you could reduce
your aversion to committing unfinished code.
