On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 12:23:16PM +0100, Jos� Fonseca wrote: > On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 12:33:49PM +0200, Felix K�hling wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm happy to report that I found a solution to the merge problems Eric > > and I were seeing. I believe the problem had to do with vendor branches. > > They are created automatically when sources are imported using cvs > > import. Many files from XFree86 had a vendor branch (e.g. revisions > > 1.1.1.x) with several revisions, each corresponding to a cvs import. The > > config-0-0-1-branch and savage_1-0-0_branch were forked off such vendor > > branches of these files. > > > > However, the last merge from XFree86 was done using cvs commit instead > > of cvs import. Therefore the new head revision of the XFree86 files was > > e.g. 1.2. Now a normal cvs update -d -j HEAD would determine 1.1 as > > common ancestor revision of the branch and the current trunk while the > > real ancestor revision is 1.1.1.x (on a vendor branch). The solution is > > to explicitly specify the ancestor revision as the branch point. This is > > the command line I used for that purpose: > > > > cvs -z3 update -d -j config-0-0-1-branch:2003-05-25 -j HEAD > > > > where 2003-05-25 is the day before the first commit on the > > config-0-0-1-branch. Note that -kk is not necessary. In fact it produces > > unnecessary conflicts instead of preventing them. > > > > I suggest an update of the cvs policy in order to avoid such problems in > > the future. The above operation would have been easier with a tag > > marking the branch point. Thus creating a branch should consist of two > > steps: > > > > cvs tag <keyword>-<revision>-fork > > cvs tag -b <keyword>-<revision>-branch > > > > Then a merge from trunk would be done with: > > > > cvs -update -d -j <keyword>-<revision>-fork -j HEAD > > > > If I get positive feedback on this I would update the wiki page myself. > > Or simply if you don't get any negative feedback - maybe its the lack of > some caffeine intake but I'm having troubles to grasp the CVS concepts you > mentio, so I'll trust on your judgment, especially since it appears to > simply the procedure considerably.
This is a little puzzling to me to, as I did do the last merge with cvs import. Alan. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
