Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Path: not-for-mail From: Charles Wilson Subject: Re: [Mostly to Charles Wilson] Upgrading Cygwin's CVS Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 19:58:48 -0500 Lines: 45 Message-ID: <3E178348.1090805@ece.gatech.edu> References: <00df01c2b43e$774f6860$fc78883e AT pomello> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet AT main DOT gmane DOT org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Max Bowsher wrote: > In http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2002-06/msg00754.html, Charles > withdrew a test cvs-1.11.2 package, saying that some bugs had been found. > I've recently compiled cvs 1.11.4 for myself, because I wanted the new rlog > command. I was wondering what these bugs were, in case I might encounter > them in my locally compiled version. Gosh, I don't remember the exact details, and can't seem to find it in my TODO or NOTES files for cvs. Trolling thru my mail archives... It seems that the problems were the standard text/binary issues, on reading .cvsignore, .cvsrc, .cvspass -- coupled with issues reading the ENTRIES, REPOSITORY, and ROOT files in the CVS dirs. Something like they tended to gain more and more ^M's at the end of each line...which led to problems. These issues are NOT problems on cvs-1.11.0, IIRC, and represent a regression for cvs-1.11.2. Plus, there are the continuing problems of hosting a cvs repository on a text mount. I think. Really, these issues are not too difficult to track down and fix, but I decided to abandon the official cvs codebase at that point(see below), and haven't worked up the gumption to re-do all of the original cygwin-porting stuff with regards to the cvsnt codebase, so we're still languishing at cvs-1.11.0. Anyway, I'm stunned to hear that the bozos running the cvs project actually got around to releasing TWO new versions (1.11.3 and 1.11.4). [No, I don't have a lot of respect for people who contemptuously ignore patches without even the courtesy of a response...after a couple of reminders over several weeks...] Because of all that, I'd pretty much decided that the next time I update the 'cvs' package, I'm going to use the cvsnt codebase (which, despite its name, does compile under unix: on "unixoid" platforms, it is essentially regular cvs + bugfixes. Bugfixes the "real" cvs maintainers seem to believe are beneath their dignity. No, I'm not bitter.) But that's a lot of testing I'm not really ready for right now. So, in answer to your question, I'd make sure that the behavior and contents of the .cvs* files, and the CVS/* files, make "sense" when your home directory and working directories are on both binary and text mounts -- and continue to make sense after a few rounds of commits and checkouts. --Chuck -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/