[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: cvs update; merge

From: Frederic Brehm
Subject: RE: cvs update; merge
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:36:27 -0400

[ On Wednesday, August 29, 2001 at 13:42:31 (-0400), Jimm Grimm wrote: ]
 Subject: RE: cvs update; merge

        Is there any way to get CVS to ignore CRLF conversions, yet still do
 > merges?  I hope I am not touching a sore spot...

At 16:04 -0400 8/29/01, Greg A. Woods wrote:
The whole idea of putting non-mergable (binary) files in CVS touches on
a very sore spot.

But, that's *not* what Jimm asked!

Jimm analyzed the problem this way...
There are four possible ways to treat files:

11  do eol conversion   do merge
10  do eol conversion   no merge
01  no eol conversion   do merge
00  no eol conversion   no merge

It seems to me that cases 11 and 01 should perfectly OK with CVS, since they are, by definition, mergable. CVS does not handle the 01 case right now.

Cases 10 and 00 cause the sore spots. Ignore those. Jimm did not ask about them [at least in that last message].

He asked if it's possible for CVS to handle the 01 case. This should invoke knowledgeable discussion about the problems of implementation, not endless flames about "binary" files.

Thank you for listening.

Fred Brehm, Sarnoff Corporation, address@hidden

reply via email to

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