Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 17:57:22 -0800 From: Don Lewis <Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com> To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, Don Lewis <Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com> Cc: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net>, Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Version Resolution? Message-ID: <199711220157.RAA16344@salsa.gv.tsc.tdk.com> In-Reply-To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> "Re: Version Resolution?" (Nov 21, 6:23pm)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 21, 6:23pm, Nate Williams wrote: } Subject: Re: Version Resolution? } > What about the most recent timestamp in the history file for that } > branch? } } What history file? CVSup doesn't know about history files, and the CVS } repository that FreeBSD uses doesn't contain one. Hmn. If were always extracting the entire tree, then you could use the most recent timestamp in any of the files that you extract. } > If you use "-r <branch_tag>:<date>", the most recent timestamp in the } > history file that is older than "<date>" should be used. } } Huh? "-r <BT>:<date?" doesn't work in CVS. I consider this a bug, but } in any case... In my somewhat dated copy of the CVS FAQ I've seen this referred to as both "-r <BT>:<date>" and "-D <BT>:<date>", the latter of which wouldn't be usable with export. I also saw mention that this only works with the vendor and main branches, which would considerably reduce it's utility.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199711220157.RAA16344>