Re: update -jx -jy gives conflict on $Id$

[Eric Siegerman]

On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 04:22:16PM -0800, Stephen Rasku wrote:
> Mike Castle wrote:
> >
> >On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 11:15:52AM -0800, Stephen Rasku wrote:
> >> Why is this [that -kk during merge is sticky] a problem?
> >> You can always do "cvs update -A" after you have checked in
> >> your changes to get rid of the sticky tag.
> >
> >Because it mucks up binary files?
> 
> That shouldn't apply in this case since he was attempting a merge of, 
> apparently, a .c file.

If one's merging an entire tree, the -A you use to fix the text
files will break the binary files for which it's not needed, but
is perforce in effect anyway.  Similarly, as someone else pointed
out, it'll trash any sticky branch that's in effect.

All of this points to the need for non-sticky variants of at
least some normally-sticky options.  What to call them, though?
I'd suggest the easily-remembered rule that -X be a nonsticky
version of -x (for all relevent values of x) ...  but -D's being
sticky gets in the way.

--

|  | /\
|-_|/  >   Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont.        address@hidden
|  |  /
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not
necessarily a good idea.
        - RFC 1925 (quoting an unnamed source)