Armel Asselin wrote: > > So I guess my questions are: > > > > 1. Assuming that we need more memory, why not all of the swap is used? > > I am not trying to say that there's something wrong with 'cvs', rather > > just trying to understand the problem. > On a 32 bits OS, you rarely can allocate more than 2GB per process for > structural reasons of the OS itself (shared libraries, code, stack... are > generally placed at an arbitrary place)... maybe with Linux64 plus a 64 bits > build of CVS you could fix your problem. > The swap has nothing to do with that sadly, the OS will not let you allocate > the memory you have (physical or swap) in a single process if you have more > than 2GB or so (maybe it is a bit more if Linux is better organized than > Windows) > > wish it helps > Armel
Thanks so much Armel, it did help inded. I have done some tests in fidling with the header of the ,v file in order to make it behave just like it was checked in on the trunk at ver 1.1 and branched together with all the other files. After a couple of tries I managed to do it in a test environment and now I am trying to do it on the 'real' server. I've got 8 files in this situation. It's not something I would like to do on a daily basis, that is for sure. Thanks, Cristian _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list Info-cvs@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
