I was having a similar experience, well over 300 directories, and we
apply tags daily (non branching at least).
We are running local mode on NT.
We recently 're-org'd the repository, by doing a checkout of the end of
the old project, and importing that as an entirely new top-level. It
worked gr
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 11:48:36AM -, Ross Burton wrote:
> Several months ago we removed a file from the CVS tree, and now we are
> trying to check a file with the same name back in again.
>
> 1038 percival:Keil |> cvs update # Normal output deleted
> 1039 percival:Keil |
Dear Pascal,
> In any case, beware of doing tests using "sources" files being
> edited. While I edit a file, I save it often, and most often, it's on
> the disk in a non-compilable (non-usable) state. To do your tests in
> your environment, all your developers should stop edit all thei
I think that it would be better to use RCS in that case. By default
CVS does not require a lock to modify a file, therefore developers
would be able to do changes to the same file and some work by be lost.
With RCS, by default, you have to do a check-out to be able to work on
a file.
Wit
Dear Laird,
> No, follow the loginfo example in the manual
> (http://www.cvshome.org/docs/manual/cvs_18.html#SEC169) and write a
> script on the repository machine to copy files on checkin to the central
> area that needs to be updated. Then you can also control what gets
> pushed to the website
Howdy --
What about the CVS repository itself?
Our repository has grown into quite the bohemoth in the
last few years. It's 150 some directories, making up almost
2 millions lines of code.
There are at least 17 live branches. Some files have, literally,
thousands of versions.
How much of a s
Hi Joerg,
The the standard version of cvs available from cvshome.org, the -D
switch only applies to the mainline and will not work with a branch.
If you need/want a version of cvs that lets -D work with branches,
then you may wish to checkout a copy of the FreeBSD version of cvs
which has been e
Keith D Richeson writes:
>
> This works fine, but there are other files on the same level as a.c, and
> another directory on that level also (parallel to myproj/). The problem
> comes when I want to update. In the test directory described above, I type
> cvs update. The problem is that when I
I've a new CVS user but an old hand at DEC's CMS code management system.
The latter was very good about allowing multiple people in one area. CVS
isn't so strong there. I think it is because old-tyme Unix hacks tended to
be lone programmers working on smaller projects and therefore didn't need
"Parand T. Darugar" wrote:
> I'd like to setup CVS for a web based project
> that involves multiple developers. We would like
> to have those multiple developers access the
> same directory of source code, as opposed to each
> having their own working area. The reason behind this
> is that every
Hello,
I am new at this stuff, but I think I have thoroughly checked manuals,
FAQs, and this list's archive. I have found discussions that come close
but none that address this issue.
I have modules defined such that I can check out the following structure:
test/
CVS/
a.c
myproj/
"Parand T. Darugar" wrote:
>
> Everything I've read suggests that doing what I want to
> do is frowned upon in CVS. My choices are to go with RCS
> and not get the benefits of CVS, which I'm loathe to do,
> or to build a very simple file locking mechanism alongside
> CVS. I'm half way through
>Several months ago we removed a file from the CVS tree, and now we are
>trying to check a file with the same name back in again.
> [omissis]
>1040 percival:Keil |> cvs commit
>cvs commit: Examining .
>cvs commit: cannot add file `standalonegeneva.lnp' when RCS file
>`/home/cvsroot/Apps/
One more data point. When I do a checkout on the cvs server, it is *very*
fast. Does that mean that the bottleneck is network and not CPU, memory or I/O?
=
=o o o o o o o . . . __ _===_||___
o _ | James A. N. Stauffer | | Stauffer
confirm
440590
Hi,
I'm trying to tag by date on a branch, but so far I did manage to get
it right. I'm using 1.10.7.
What I've tried is
- rtag with -r and -D on which cvs complains they are mutually
exclusive
- tag -D on a checked-out copy of that branch. It tagged the main
trunk instead
- tag -r -D on
Hi,
Several months ago we removed a file from the CVS tree, and now we are
trying to check a file with the same name back in again.
1038 percival:Keil |> cvs update
cvs update: Updating .
cvs update: use `cvs add' to create an entry for standalonegeneva.lnp
1039 percival:Keil |> cvs add standa
17 matches
Mail list logo
