Re: state of the 2.6.13 transition

On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 00:30 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-09-20 at 16:14 -0700, Matthew Reimer wrote:
> > One more detail: I think the breakage relates to files that exist only on 
> > the 
> > vendor branch; i.e., files that we haven't modified from upstream.
> 
> Yeah, exactly.  This all stems from the fact that CVS only tracks
> changes on a file-by-file basis: it doesn't have any understanding of
> the relationships between different files.
> 
> CVS considers the HEAD to be a derivate of the vendor branch, which is
> reasonable enough in itself. Unfortunately, the way it implements this
> is that, for files that have never been modified in our tree, the tip of
> the vendor branch "shows through" into the HEAD.

Would it be possible to fix this by creating a new branch
starting with the last known good version, then
making that branch the default? Something like:
  cvs update -d -r K2-6-12-hh3
  cvs tag -b NEW-TRUNC
  cvs admin -bNEW-TRUNC

Just a thought...

-- 
Bye, Patrick Ohly
--  
Patrick.Ohly-Mmb7MZpHnFY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
patrick-1rQ0xA3VWYg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (MakeCD related mails)
http://home.pages.de/~ohly/
http://makecd.core.de/ (MakeCD home page)