Re: Problem with partially lost branch information

2002-11-27 Thread Karl-König Königsson
Eric Siegerman wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:05:00PM +0100, Karl-König Königsson wrote: That's just the approach I'd have taken; but ouch! I bet it took a *long* time. Try it this way instead: cvs log | egrep '^Working file:|forv_ver1_020311-branch' [...] cvs log is a wrapper for

Re: Problem with partially lost branch information

2002-11-25 Thread Karl-König Königsson
Larry Jones wrote: Most likely, there is at least one file in each of those directories where that tag is a revision tag rather than a branch tag. I have found a few files with this problem: I used the cvs graphing capability of WinCVS to look for tags instead of branches, but that was very

Re: Problem with partially lost branch information

2002-11-25 Thread Eric Siegerman
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 02:05:00PM +0100, Karl-König Königsson wrote: [...] a file with the branch tag set should have a cvs version number with a zero in it; one of the adminstrative numbers. I thus did this from the command line: find . -type f -exec sh -c cvs -q log {} | grep

Re: Problem with partially lost branch information

2002-11-22 Thread Karl-König Königsson
Larry Jones wrote: Most likely, there is at least one file in each of those directories where that tag is a revision tag rather than a branch tag. On the spot. There were files in the repository where the branch tag had for some reason been transformed to version tags. If this was due to

Re: Problem with partially lost branch information

2002-11-22 Thread Larry Jones
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Karl-K=F6nig_K=F6nigsson?= writes: On the spot. There were files in the repository where the branch tag had for some reason been transformed to version tags. If this was due to user error or a freak problem with CVS is hard to say, though user error is always the main

Problem with partially lost branch information

2002-11-21 Thread Karl-König Königsson
Hi all, I have a problem with my CVS repository that I don't understand: I have a branch called forv_ver1_020311-branch in a module named itp which has been in use for quite a while (as you can tell from the name). I have created a local sandbox of this branch with the following: cvs co -r

Re: Problem with partially lost branch information

2002-11-21 Thread Donald Sharp
I would suggest that the forv_ver1_02X branch tag doesn't exist in the first two directories. Since it looks like you know the date when the tag was applied you can pull a workspace with the cvs co -D date command for those two directories and then apply the branch tag. Then you should be

Re: Problem with partially lost branch information

2002-11-21 Thread Karl-König Königsson
Donald Sharp wrote: I would suggest that the forv_ver1_02X branch tag doesn't exist in the first two directories. Since it looks like you know the date when the tag was applied you can pull a workspace with the cvs co -D date command for those two directories and then apply the branch tag.

Re: Problem with partially lost branch information

2002-11-21 Thread Larry Jones
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Karl-K=F6nig_K=F6nigsson?= writes: As you can see is the branch treated as a tag in two of these, whereas it is a branch in the rest. This has the upshot that it is impossible to add files to the first two directories in this branch, but quite allright in the other three.