On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 09:44:17AM -0400, Adam Bregenzer wrote: > Try passing the branch tag of the branch you want to branch off of to -r > instead of its number. > Like: > cvs rtag -b -r OLD_BRANCH_TAG NEW_BRANCH_TAG fred.cc > > Disclaimer: I can't say I've tried that before, but I don't see any > reason why it wouldn't work. Can anybody on the list verify that?
This works fine - I've (unfortunately) had to use it a few times. James > Adam > > > On Thu, 2002-09-19 at 08:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I'm sure this issue has been raised before, but since I have not been able > > to find any specific info on this I'm hoping someone will be able to > > provide an explanation anyway. > > > > The problem is straightforward: using rtag to create a branch with a > > symbolic tag does not actually create a branch if you specify only the > > major numeric revision with the -r option; it appears that CVS considers > > that a special branch, and does not create a branch-off-branch. > > > > For example, let's say I have the following revisions for file fred.cc: > > > > 1.1 > > 2.1 > > 2.2 > > 3.1 > > > > Now, what I would like to do is make a branch at the latest revision at > > major version number 2 as follows: > > > > cvs rtag -b -r2 mytag fred.cc > > > > Running "cvs update -r mytag fred.cc" works fine, and "cvs status -v > > fred.cc" shows that the sticky tag is "mytag (branch: 2)". However, you > > cannot commit any changes to this file because the branch is actually just > > major revision 2, which you cannot commit to because the current major > > revision number is 3. So, rtag effectively did not create a branch at all. > > > > This example would be easy to fix by specifing the full revision number > > (e.g., -r2.2), but this is obviously not feasible for large numbers of > > files and directories. There are other ways around this, such as creating a > > temporary symbolic tag at -r2 and then creating the branch tag off of the > > symbolic tag; a nuisance but a valid workaround as long as there no > > branches created already. If there are, CVS does create a > > branch-off-branch, and you end up with more branches than you wanted. > > > > From the way that other commands such as update work, and from reading the > > documentation, I would have expected rtag to behave the same way given just > > the major revision number as other commands (i.e., work off of the most > > recent delta on that branch). It does if there is already a branch, but not > > if the only "branch" is the major revision number. > > > > Basically I'm wondering whether this is a bug, feature, omission, etc. Any > > background would be appreciated. > > > > Thanks, > > Kevin > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Info-cvs mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Info-cvs mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs -- James Stalker Ensembl Web Project Leader - http://www.ensembl.org _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
