[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Intended behaviour when updating?

From: Dirk Kuypers
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Intended behaviour when updating?
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:18:47 +0200

On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 15:05, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> Dirk Kuypers wrote:
> > because the directory they have been in was new. Is this a bug? Or is it
> > intended behaviour and it is my fault to not add the files before
> > updating?
> Ach.  That's painful.  It partly depends on what you have set for 
> untagged-source.  If untagged-source is junk, then tla's behavour is 
> legitimate.  If untagged-source is source, then it should have committed 
> it anyway.  If untagged-source is unrecognized, it should have refused 
> to do anything until you added the files and directory.

And if

untagged-source precious

is set?;-) 

I admit that we are not quite sure here in our group, what we should set
there. For me as a non-native English speaker untagged-source precious
means "don't throw away files you recognize as source files and which
are not in the inventory right now".

> It seems changeset application isn't quite right here; tla should never 
> delete a directory that contains backup or precious files.

So you agree this is a bug?

Never trust a short-haired guru

reply via email to

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