-----Original Message----- From: Teala Spitzbarth Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:32 AM To: 'Whitlock, Ginger'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Why does 'cvs admin -l<branchname>' complain that my branch is absent?
Oh, yuck..... I know from other email that Larry has sent me that the way CVS handles branches can be problematic in some commands - i.e. CVS doesn't actually create a branched version of each file when the branch is created (that is why you see the magic zero in that fake branch revision number for files that haven't been modified yet). This behavior can sometimes cause conflict with how RCS works under the covers. For example, the log command will have erroneous output for files on branches when they are first modified, due to the fact that the "previous" (magic zero)revision on the branch doesn't really exist yet at the RCS level, causing the log code to fall into an error condition. (Larry may have fixed this is the development version by now...) I believe the admin -l command is fundamentally an RCS level command - so I bet it can't lock unmodified versions on a branch, because at the RCS level, those versions of the file don't really "exist"..... There are versions of commit-info scripts kicking around that allow you to lock branches - you may want to consider one of those. See for example: http://ccvs.cvshome.org/servlets/GetAttachmentmsgId=1229&attachId=1&listName=info (Note: I'm pretty sure this script got munged somehow and the exit 0 should be outside of the for loop, otherwise recursive commits might slip through onto a locked branch) Cheers, Teala __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
