Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Moving directories to a new branches tree-root (tree root id?)

[Jan Hudec]

On Sun, Apr 04, 2004 at 12:15:22 +0200, Ben Burns wrote:
> On Sunday 04 April 2004 10:49, Jan Hudec wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 16:28:50 +0200, Ben Burns wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I wanted to find out if the tree root can have an arch id tag like any
> > > other file and directory in the source tree. I have heard arch does not
> > > use it. If not, how can arch know that a downstream source has moved a
> > > directory to the tree-root? So that any file or directory added to the
> > > upstream directory would be included in merges in the downstream's tree
> > > root.
> > >
> > > If so, how can you do it,
> > >     # tla mv some/dir .
> > > obviously wouldn't work (will create dir in the tree root), whereas
> > >     # tla mv some/dir/* .
> > > will drop upstream additions to dir.
> > >
> > > On the otherhand
> > >     # tla add .
> > > does seem to work.
> > >
> > > I would think that being able move id tagged directories to the root
> > > would be useful for splitting large upstream trees into smaller ones
> > > buildable with configs.
> >
> > There is exactly one tree root in a branch. Thus it can't be moved and
> > does not need (nor use) tag. If you mv some/dir/* . you move each file
> > in some/dir to ., not some/dir itself.
> >
> > If you split large tree to configs, each subtree is _completely
> > separate_ from arch's point of view. You can't move files between them
> > -- they will be removed from one and added in the other.
> >
> > tla add . works simply because it's quite simple-minded.
> >
> > > P.S: This didn't get sent yesterday, so I had a chance to think this
> > > through a little more. I think the proper way to split a large tree into
> > > a smaller one would be to branch the current tree, init-tree in the
> > > directory you want using the new branch and make-sync-tree with the new
> > > branch. Committing the resulting branch should make the new version
> > > updateable (starmergable?) from the big tree without errors. Syncing the
> > > big tree with this revision should mean the big tree can starmerge future
> > > patches from the small tree too.
> > >
> > > So, does arch use the id in the tree-root if it exists? Will this work?
> > > Some at #arch didn't seem to think so.
> >
> > The tree-root is not part of the branch. It's container for the
> > checked-out tree. Arch won't (and shouldn't) ever look at it's id.
> >
> > However, what you described above should work as expected -- just
> > attributes for the directory won't be recorded. But since files will be
> > matched by tags no matter what directory they are in, patches will find
> > the right place to apply to.
> 
> This is what I doubt, let me give an example:
> split--bigtree--0:
>       .       
>       + --- a/aA/aA.txt
>       + --- a/aB/aB.txt
>       + --- b/bA/bA.txt
>       + --- b/bB/bB.txt
> 
> in directories 'a', and 'b' we do tag, init-tree, sync tree, commit to give 
> us:
> split--a-project--0:
>       . (id matches bigtree a)
>       + ---   aA/aA.txt
>       + ---   aB/aB.txt
> and,
> split--b-project--0:
>       . (id matches bigtree b)
>       + ---   bA/bA.txt
>       + ---   bB/bB.txt
> 
> then in bigtree we commit a patch that changes the tree to:
>       .       
>       + --- a/aA/aA.txt
>       + --- a/aC/aC.txt
>       + --- a/aB/aB.txt [added]
>       + --- b/bA/bA.txt
>       + --- b/bB/bB.txt
>       + --- b/bC/bC.txt [added]
> 
> so, when we then do a subsequent star-merge from bigtree to a-project and 
> b-project, I would expect to have:
> split--a-project--0:
>       .
>       + ---   aA/aA.txt
>       + ---   aB/aB.txt
>       + ---   aC/aC.txt [added]
> 
> split--b-project--0:
>       .
>       + ---   aA/aA.txt
>       + ---   aB/aB.txt
>       + ---   aC/aC.txt [added]

No. Both files must get added to both trees!

> in, fact, when I star-merge bigtree into a-project, what I actually get is
> split--a-project--0:
>       .
>       + --- a/aC/aC.txt [added to wrong directory]

In the patchset, the mapping is tag to full path, not tag to name and
parent tag.

>       + --- aA/aA.txt
>       + --- aB/aB.txt
>       + --- b/bC/bC.txt [added incorrectly]

Added correctly. How did you explain to it, that is should NOT add the
file? It is in the changeset.

> if I do an update to split--a-project--0 from bigtree, I get no changes 
> except 
> for the addition of the patchlog.
> 
> The odd thing is that the id of the a directory in the bigtree is the same as 
> the id of the tree-root of the a-project, and I think the reason this is not 
> working is that arch is treating the tree-root specially as regards to its 
> id.  I don't unsertand why it should be treated differently.

It does NOT treat the tree-root AT ALL. The tree-root is NOT a part of
the source, but a container for it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec 
<address@hidden>

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature