[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Jones) writes: > Stuart Cooper writes: > > > > but this is a bit tricky, so making copies, doing cvs update -A and > > then moving the > > copies over and then checking in is perfectly acceptable. > > As long as you're the only one making changes. If there's a possibility > of other people checking in changes, too, you need to check after the > update -A for other changes that need to be merged into your changes. > In that case, doing the update correctly (with two -j options) is much > simpler.
How is it different from update -A *without* copying anything on top of it? My experience is that update -A would perform regular merge of current changes into the head version. Am I missing something? -- Sergei. _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list Info-cvs@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
