Re: CVS Update Behaviour

[Noel Yap]

--- "Greg A. Woods" <address@hidden> wrote:
> [ On Sunday, February 24, 2002 at 22:09:31 (-0800),
> Paul Sander wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: CVS Update Behaviour
> >
> > Hmmm...  Let's recap:
> > 
> > >>      cp $1 $2
> > >>      cvs rm -f $1
> > >>      cvs add $2
> > >>      cvs commit -m "moved $1 to $2" $1 $2
> > 
> > Where is the *location of the RCS file* recorded
> in the comment?
> 
> You don't need to know the location of the RCS files
> -- that's internal
> to CVS and not for human consumption.  It's of no
> use in a client-server
> invocation in any case.

Oh, I think I see.  The wrapper would parse the output
of the comment (hoping that it doesn't get confused
with comments that merely /look/ like rename
comments), and follow the chain of renames.

This sounds slow since it'll require a CVS invocation
for each rename.  It's also a little brittle in that
if there's a new CVS command, one would need to wrap
that as well (unless you pass all commands to CVS and
make it handle bad commands).

> You don't need to know it because of course the
> pathnames given in the
> parameters $1 and $2 will always have a fixed
> relationship to each other
> and that relationship is sufficient to transform
> either into the
> pathname necessary for use with 'cvs log' or 'cvs
> update -p', etc. no
> matter where the reader starts from (so long as they
> are within a
> working directory for the same module and so long as
> they know where
> they are with relation to the log they're currently
> reading).  This is
> really very trivial pathname stuff -- I don't
> understand why you even
> think it's an issue.

You're assuming no absolute paths are given to the
command.

Noel

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
http://sports.yahoo.com