Hmmm, it was indeed originated as a new clone immediately followed by an 'update -r jdk8-b73' to take it back to the previous level, or so I thought.
You can probably tell that I was under the impression that the commands 'clone -r level' and 'clone && update -r level' were equivalent ... self-evidently not. Very many thanx for your forebearance in being a sounding board. -- Dave Pointon FIAP MBCS Now I saw, tho' too late, the folly of beginning a work before we count the cost and before we we judge rightly of our strength to go thro' with it - Robinson Crusoe On 7 May 2014 19:29, David Katleman <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 5/7/2014 11:18 AM, Dave Pointon wrote: > > ... having said that though, with the benefit of a little hindsight and > the application of not a little CM common sense, isn't there a shortfall in > Mercurial in as much as I would expect an update to b73 to remove nashorn > as a sub-repo from the forest since it wasn't present when the tag was > created ... or is it me ? > > > Update to b73 implies you are coming from an earlier build of the JDK 8 > forest, where nashorn also does not exist as well. Mercurial doesn't know > of nashorn's existence yet. > > If you have a later build of the JDK 8 forest, you are better off with a > new clone, rather than expecting mercurial will downgrade your repos. I > would not want mecurial removing my new repos I've just created within my > forest, if I happen to do a pull from a forest that didn't have my new > repo. > > Dave > > > > > -- > Dave Pointon FIAP MBCS > > Now I saw, tho' too late, the folly of beginning a work before we count > the cost and before we we judge rightly of our strength to go thro' with it > - Robinson Crusoe > > > On 7 May 2014 19:00, Dave Pointon <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanx for the fast response, Dave - reply duly noted and indeed >> promulgated :-) >> >> Thanx again , >> >> -- >> Dave Pointon FIAP MBCS >> >> Now I saw, tho' too late, the folly of beginning a work before we count >> the cost and before we we judge rightly of our strength to go thro' with it >> - Robinson Crusoe >> >> >> On 7 May 2014 18:57, David Katleman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 5/7/2014 10:18 AM, Dave Pointon wrote: >>> >>>> Greetings fellow builders , >>>> >>>> I have a question, as the subject suggests, regarding the version of the >>>> nashorn repo - specifically, one of my current tasks is to attempt to >>>> build >>>> OJDK level jdk8-b73 but I can't find that level/tag in the nashorn repo. >>>> >>>> Is there a usual or even standard, method used in OJDK to establish the >>>> appropriate level of sub-repos ? >>>> >>> >>> nashorn wasn't added to JDK 8 until about b82, so earlier tags wouldn't >>> be there. >>> >>> Looks like the creator of nashorn did add some older tags to the repo to >>> help out in situations like this, but b73 was omitted >>> >>> In this case, you could use jdk8-b69, and you would get the same as what >>> you would get for b73, which is nothing, since nashorn was still empty. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Dave >>> >> >> > >
