bug-cvs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

CVS problems with revision numbers 0.* ?


From: Michele Zamparelli
Subject: CVS problems with revision numbers 0.* ?
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 14:07:15 +0100

Hallo,

I am trying to move an RCS archive to CVS. Everything worked fine
until I found a strange behaviour when the *,v files included delta
numbers
starting with 0. (file revisions like 0.0, 0.1 etc. etc.).

The behaviour is the following:
assume the highest revision for the file BROKEN is 0.2
I do a checkout from the archive, modify absolutely nothing, but
when I do a commit I get an annoying message that BROKEN has been added
as new.

More in detail:

> cvs  co Test/BROKEN
U Test/BROKEN

> cvs  commit Test

CVS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CVS: Enter Log.  Lines beginning with `CVS:' are removed automatically
CVS:
CVS: Committing in .
CVS:
CVS: Added Files:
CVS:    Test/BROKEN
CVS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Notice the content of Test/CVS/Entries:

/BROKEN/0.2/dummy timestamp//
D

It seems that the checkout command was not able to determine the
timestamp for the revision 0.2.

Notice that the RCS file as such is healthy, you can check in and out
using RCS commands, and
the cvs log command produces the following output:

RCS file: /project6/CVS/Test/BROKEN,v
Working file: Test/BROKEN
head: 0.2
branch:
locks: strict
access list:
symbolic names:
keyword substitution: kv
total revisions: 3;     selected revisions: 3
description:

----------------------------
revision 0.2
date: 2002/11/28 17:19:02;  author: vltsccm;  state: Exp;  lines: +8 -1
expat0.2
----------------------------
revision 0.1
date: 2002/08/30 06:41:58;  author: vltsccm;  state: Exp;  lines: +0 -0
expat0.1
----------------------------
revision 0.0
date: 2002/08/29 14:51:54;  author: vltsccm;  state: Exp;
*** empty log message ***
=============================================================================



I cannot believe that this is true, I must be doing something wrong.
I am using  1.11.1p1 on Linux RH.
Could anybody help me ?

Thanks

Michele





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]