[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?
Thanks
Dirk
--
Never trust a short-haired guru