[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: conflict on added files

From: Paul Edwards
Subject: Re: conflict on added files
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 11:09:31 GMT

"Pierre Asselin" <pa@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
> When I type in the steps in Paul's script, the "update -j" gives
>     $ cvs update -jtag1 -jtag2 one.c
>     cvs update: file one.c exists, but has been added in revision tag2
> So the update failed.  However,

Well, "fail" is a bit strong.  :-)

>     $ cvs status one.c
>     ===================================================================
>     File: one.c             Status: Up-to-date
>     Working revision:    1.4     Wed Jun 11 00:33:25 2003
>     . . .
> I'd say Paul has a point.  I'm not sure the patch is enough.  The

It is hopefully enough to failsafe.

> status would change to 'conflict', but the file would contain no
> conflict markers, right?

Correct.  That would be better, but won't make much difference
in either case, because the conflicts will be likely the entire

> How is one to remember what the conflict was about?

That's a nuisance, you have to either save the output of the
update, or you need to do the command again etc, but at least
it failsafes.  Being annoying and being an integrity problem
are very different things.

Of course I would like the annoying thing to go away too.

> Paul's patch is probably useful to him, because his processes create
> more add conflicts than usual, but it's not a general solution.

It should be useful to anyone concerned about integrity.

> Five things can happen in the sandbox, and the same five can happen
> between the two -j revisions:
>     file never present
>     file added
>     file unchanged
>     file modified
>     file deleted
> The update command should really handle all 25 combinations and leave
> the sandbox in a state where any conflict can be identified.  This would
> require changes to more than just update.  In a couple of the 25 cases,
> I'm not even sure what correct action should be!

Sure, there may be more potential integrity holes in that lot.  I
just haven't come across them yet so don't know what CVS's
behaviour is.  I only know about the added one because it bit
me, and I learned to defend against it.

BFN.  Paul.

reply via email to

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