John Polstra writes:
> > $ cvs co -D 'January 18, 1999 0:00' freebsd/src/usr.sbin/xntpd/lib/ranny.c
> >
> > Perhaps version 1.1.1.2 would be correct, but instead you get 1.1.
>
> CVS has a heuristic that does the wrong thing for this particular
> file. The code is around line 3252 of src/contrib/cvs/src/rcs.c in
> the function RCS_getdate():
>
> if (! STREQ (cur_rev, "1.1"))
> return (xstrdup (cur_rev));
>
> /* This is 1.1; if the date of 1.1 is not the same as that for the
> 1.1.1.1 version, then return 1.1. This happens when the first
> version of a file is created by a regular cvs add and commit,
> and there is a subsequent cvs import of the same file. */
> p = findnode (rcs->versions, "1.1.1.1");
> if (p)
> {
> vers = (RCSVers *) p->data;
> if (RCS_datecmp (vers->date, date) != 0)
> return xstrdup ("1.1");
> }
>
> It compares the dates on the theory that an import will set
> identical dates in revisions 1.1 and 1.1.1.1. But in the file you
> mentioned, they are off by 1 second. So CVS doesn't recognize it as
> an import.
>
> revision 1.1
> date: 1993/12/21 18:36:22; author: wollman; state: Exp;
>
> revision 1.1.1.1
> date: 1993/12/21 18:36:23; author: wollman; state: Exp; lines: +0 -0
>
> Probably the import straddled the seconds boundary. I hope current
> versions of CVS force the dates to be the same on an import. I
> haven't checked to see whether that's the case or not.
Hmm.. sounds like we should do one or both of these things..
1/ Fix the bug in CVS that caused the import to set two different dates
2/ Modify this cvs file to set the dates to be the same
What do you think?
-Archie
___________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
