RE: CVS problem

[Chris Cameron]

That was my first reaction as well.  However IMHO this theory is incorrect.

1. I check out a file.
2. I build the .o file
3. I make changes to the file.
4. I realise I made a mistake in the changes, so I remove the file and do an
update
5. make will now do an unnecessary rebuild of my .o file

Only I can make decision as to whether the make needs to rebuild the .o file
and the best way for me to make the decision is to manually remove the .o
file if it needs rebuilding!  This rebuild could have knock on effects
throughout the rest of the developers sandbox.

***************************************************************
Chris Cameron                       Open Telecommunications Ltd
Product Manager                           IN Product Management
address@hidden                           P.O.Box 10-388
      +64 4 495 8403 (DDI)                          The Terrace
fax:  +64 4 495 8419                                 Wellington
cell: +64 21 650 680                                New Zealand
Life, don't talk to me about life ....(Marvin - HHGTTG)


-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden Behalf Of
Jerry Nairn
Sent: Thursday, 10 May 2001 5:50 a.m.
To: 'Chris Cameron'; Infocvs
Subject: RE: CVS problem


>From: Chris Cameron [mailto:address@hidden
>Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 10:42 PM

>The checkout gets the correct timestamnp on the file.
>
>The first update gives bar.cc a timestamp which corresponds to the
>time you issued the update command.
>
>The second update give bar.cc the timestamp of the original
>checkin time of bar.cc

That's the way it's supposed to work, to interact properly with make.
Jerry

_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
address@hidden
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs