Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.3 branded

From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian(at)airs(dot)com>
To: pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us
Cc: ian(at)airs(dot)com
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.3 branded
Date: 2000-11-03 20:29:32
Message-ID: 20001103202932.15421.qmail@daffy.airs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 15:11:00 -0500 (EST)

cvs log -rREL7_0_PATCHES

I want just log entries that are part of the branch. I get all entries.

What I see when I try this is that for files which have the
REL7_0_PATCHES tag (i.e., files which are on the branch), I see only
log entries for the branch. For files which are do not have the
REL7_0_PATCHES tag (i.e., are not on the branch), I see all log
entries.

For example, in the top pgsql directory,
cvs log -rREL7_0_PATCHES HISTORY
gives me only log entries for the branch for the HISTORY file.
However,
cvs log -rREL7_0_PATCHES GNUmakefile.in
gives me all log entries. It also gives me this warning:
cvs server: warning: no revision `REL7_0_PATCHES' in `/home/projects/pgsql/cvsroot/pgsql/GNUmakefile.in,v'

Is this also what you see?

The natural way to fix this ought to be
cvs co -rREL7_0_PATCHES pgsql
cvs log .
Unfortunately, I tried it, and cvs log, I believe erroneously, seems
to pick up all files in the directory, even if they have not been
checked out.

I can tell you a hideous kludge to avoid this, but I can't claim that
it is the way to operate. Check out the branch using the -r option as
above. Then do this:
find . -name CVS -type d -exec touch '{}/Entries.Static' \;
After that, in the same directory, do
cvs log -rREL7_0_PATCHES

I'd hate to have to explain why that works.

Which version of CVS are you running on the server? When I find some
time I'll see about fixing cvs log.

Ian

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-11-03 20:34:44 Re: Re[2]: postgres not use table access permissions ?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-11-03 20:19:52 Re: postgres not use table access permissions ?