On Tue, 5 Oct 1999, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 1999, Yan Zhang Chen wrote:
>
> > Just curious: why including binary files like the "etc/patch.tar"
> > in the source tree?
>
> Where else would you place them? Everything of mod_ssl is in CVS, so those
> files are in CVS, too.
My question was actually: should the "etc/patch.tar" expanded in
the distribution source tree, instead of un-tarred during the
configure run? We have our CVS policy against storing any generated
or binary files like such tar balls.
> > How am I supposed to handle this when I import the
> > source into CVS; importing the binary or importing the untarred text
> > files (which means I'll have "modified" the distribution tree before
> > putting it into CVS, which is always not preferred)?
>
> Sorry, I still do not see the problem. You can just import the patch.tar file
> into CVS. CVS is aware of binary files. Just make sure keywords are not
> expanded by later doing a "cvs admin -kb" on it. That's all and doesn't harm.
For some policy reason (good or bad) we don't use "cvs admin".
We also have the implicit rule against storing binaries in CVS.
Looks like I'll have to deal with this "etc/patch.tar" separately:
(1). firstly importing it together with rest of the source tree,
(2). "cvs remove" it; (3). "cvs add -kb" it again; (4). moving
the tag for this file.
What'd you think?
Thanks,
--Yan
______________________________________________________________________
Apache Interface to OpenSSL (mod_ssl) www.modssl.org
User Support Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
