RE: cvs update; merge

[Frederic Brehm]

> [ 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
--
Fred Brehm, Sarnoff Corporation, address@hidden