Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 16:48:41 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT Com
Subject: Re: CVS branches RFC
Message-ID: <20011004164841.A31422@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT Com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT Com
References: <0fc101c1454a$aa8b8010$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010924185131 DOT A32613 AT redhat DOT com> <100d01c14550$bd31eaf0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <3BBB6ED6 DOT 26A88BE3 AT yahoo DOT com> <03a501c14c58$2e1dc320$01000001 AT lifelesswks> <20011003181839 DOT C3772 AT redhat DOT com> <03f301c14c59$dfb6bd20$01000001 AT lifelesswks> <3BBC4995 DOT CA82EBCA AT yahoo DOT com> <20011004162208 DOT A26858 AT redhat DOT com> <3BBCC86D DOT 2E5A7FE AT yahoo DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3BBCC86D.2E5A7FE@yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i

On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 04:37:01PM -0400, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 07:35:49AM -0400, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>> >Robert Collins wrote:
>> >> Which, BTW is why I suggested these scripts - small they are, but
>> >> powerful too :}.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Yep. And Chris could have created a branch for his changes so as to not
>> >destroy a working snapshot.  ;D.
>> 
>> Huh?  You lost me here.
>> 
>> Robert says the scripts are powerful and you accuse me of "destroy"ing
>> a working snapshot.  I don't see how one observation flows from the other.
>> And, I'm not sure what snapshot you think it was that was "destroy"ed.
>> 
>> I'm not sure why my name suddenly poppped up in this context.
>> 
>
>I was referring to "Message-ID:   <20011003181839 DOT C3772 AT redhat DOT com>"
>where you stated:
>
><quote>
>And, FYI, I have been merrily trying to deal with my "simple" change
>of adding a path_conv call to build_fhandler.  It has had some really
>amazing repercussions throughout the code which I'm sure make merging
>harder.
>
>I must have unconsciously known that raw devices were a bag of worms
>since I was asking other people to test them.  Chuck's findings earlier
>today showed that I couldn't just ignore devices and hope that they
>just worked.
></quote>

"raw devices not completely working" == "destroy a snapshot"?

Uh huh.

cgf