[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] apply-delta target directory

From: David Allouche
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] apply-delta target directory
Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 18:01:09 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/

On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 08:52:32AM -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> David Allouche wrote:
> >"tla apply-delta REV-A REV-B" applies the delta changeset to the current
> >directory, not the tree-root.
> Yeah, I thought that was odd behaviour too.  I wasn't sure if there was 
> some reasonable reason for behaving this way, though of course, scripts 
> like aba change-version can avoid this by manually specifying the tree root.

You can often work around bugs. It's better to fix them.

> It comes down to the two-faced nature of delta.  If you run delta in a 
> non-Arch tree, it will compare to the current directory.  If you run 
> delta in an arch tree, it will compare to the tree-root.

Beg your pardon? I must be missing some fundamental feature of Arch...

Only Arch source trees (set-up by init-tree) define a tagging-method.
Changesets rely on tree inventories, so you can only create a changeset
between two trees which define id-tagging-methods.[1] What sense could
there be in computing a changeset between A and B where either A or B is
not a proper Arch source tree?

[1] In addition, for the changeset to be useful, you need the tagging
    methods to be somewhat consistent so most of the identical files in
    both trees have the same id. But that's a secondary issue.

It might make sense to compare _parts_ of Arch source trees, because the
tagging method is inherited by all subtrees of an Arch source tree, for
example to implement subtree commit, but that seems a dangerous road to
go because it breaks the "whole-tree changeset" model.

But in any case, using non-Arch trees with delta does not make sense in
Arch as I understand it. Please educate me if I'm wrong.

> Given that behaviour, I guess it's reasonable to expect apply-delta to 
> behave the same way.  If people really want to apply the changeset to 
> the wrong directory, they can use delta and apply-changeset.

I cannot understand what you mean. You seem to say: "given <broken>,
it's reasonable to expect apply-delta to <be-broken>. If people want to
<break> then can <not-use-apply-delta>" which is contradictory.

In any case, I'd expect the changeset-applying function to shout and cry
if the user is trying to apply a changeset involving patchlogs to a
directory which is not a tree-root.

                                                            -- ddaa

reply via email to

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