RCS Keyword Conflicts During Merge (was RE: [cvsnt] Re: minor Buginupdate in Build 1927)

David Hauck davidh at netacquire.com
Wed Apr 6 18:22:01 BST 2005


Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.


Hi Matt, yes, that would make sense (up -j -kk..., with subsequent commit
omitting any keyword expansion options). So this is what you do to
explicitly ignore these sorts of conflicts from appearing?
Regards,
-David

> It that they way to ignore keywords when doing diffs and merges
> was to use
> the -kk option to prevent keywords from being expanded.
>
> It's worked in all cases for me so far.
>
> Matt S.
>
>
> "David Hauck" <davidh at netacquire.com> wrote in message
> news:mailman.27.1112806781.460.cvsnt at cvsnt.org...
> > Hi,
> >
> > What do others normally do in these circumstances (i.e., conflicts that
> > occur in RCS keywords)? Resolving these conflicts really doesn't do much
> > since, in operation, the commit of the resulting resolution
> always results
> > in a new "value" for the keyword (depending on keyword expansion flags)
> > anyways. I've often wondered if CVS merge could be optimized somehow in
> this
> > regard to eliminate/ignore RCS keyword conflicts; they're a pain, in my
> > mind, to deal with currently.
> >
> > I'm interested in hearing how others manage this issue.
> >
> > Regards,
> > -David
> >
> > > On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 18:42:09 +0200, Richard Wirth
> > > <r.wirth at wirthware.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > >File contents:
> > > >
> > > ><<<<<<< Dmakefile
> > > >;;; $Header: /home/cvs/repo1/Dmakefile,v 1.11 2003/10/16
> > > 14:28:07 me Exp $
> > > >=======
> > > >;;; $Header: /home/cvs/repo1/Dmakefile,v 1.14 2005/04/05
> > > 13:01:57 other Exp $
> > > >>>>>>>> 1.14
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >This is the only conflict! So why is this a conflict at all??
> > >
> > > Hmm, if there *is* a modification in the same line on the two
> > > revisions then this is per definition a conflict. CVS can hardly
> > > decide that the conflict is too small to bother with, can it?
> > >
> > >
> > > /Bo
> > > (Bo Berglund, developer in Sweden)
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cvsnt mailing list
> > > cvsnt at cvsnt.org cvsnt downloads at march-hare.com @CVSNT on Twitter CVSNT on Facebook
> > > http://www.cvsnt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cvsnt https://www.march-hare.com/cvspro/en.asp#downcvs
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cvsnt mailing list
> cvsnt at cvsnt.org cvsnt downloads at march-hare.com @CVSNT on Twitter CVSNT on Facebook
> http://www.cvsnt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cvsnt https://www.march-hare.com/cvspro/en.asp#downcvs




More information about the cvsnt mailing list
Download the latest CVSNT, TortosieCVS, WinCVS etc. for Windows 8 etc.
@CVSNT on Twitter   CVSNT on Facebook