[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: cvs diff, proposal for change

From: luke . kendall
Subject: Re: cvs diff, proposal for change
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 12:46:45 +1000 (EST)

On  5 Sep, Greg A. Woods wrote:
>  > cvs already supports binary files to the extent of offering 
>  > -kb. 
>  "CVS supports binary files"?!?!?!?  No, I don't think so.  The '-kb' 
>  "sticky flag" is just a terribly bad hack that gets more people into 
>  more trouble with CVS than you could ever imagine because it gets 
>  mis-interpreted as doing what you think it does.  It was not intended 
>  for that purpose at all and it does not work the way you think it does. 
>  DO NOT try to store binary files in CVS. 

We are currently storing gigabytes of binary data files in our CVS
repository along with lots of text data.  We have found that if you
remember to cvs add -kb from Windows (mandatory) or Unix (recommended),
or to mark the files as binary after check-in under Unix *before* the
first-ever modification is made, it can cope.  At the cost of
performance penalties.

But reading the above I'm wondering whether there's some other danger
that we're unaware of, that would make us change our current methods.

I've read the FAQ section on binary files, and found nothing there that
I/we weren't already aware of.



reply via email to

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