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.
> Presumably 1.1.1.2 was in your sandbox - this is a 3-way merge, with the > diff between 1.1.1.1.2.1 and 1.1.1.1 being merged into whatever was in > the sandbox already. Nope, my sandbox was empty... so I don't think it was doing a 3-way merge (even though that's what appears to be happening). Ow crap... just realized where I had gone wrong I should have done: cvs co -r FRED_2_FIXES -j FRED_1_FIXES prj/fred instead of cvs co -j FRED_2_FIXES -j FRED_1_FIXES prj/fred Since this way I co the FRED_2_FIXES branch and at the same time merge in the changes held in FRED_1_FIXES branch. (Although I thought -j A -j B would have been identical in functionality to -r A -j B .. at least that what I understand from the docs) > If you want to just merge between two branches update to one and merge > with the other. Yep, that works just fine too :-) $ cvs co -r FRED_2_FIXES prj/fred cvs server: Updating prj/fred U prj/fred/fred.c $ cvs update -j FRED_1_FIXES cvs server: Updating . RCS file: /omz13/prj/fred/fred.c,v retrieving revision 1.1.1.1 retrieving revision 1.1.1.1.2.1 Merging differences between 1.1.1.1 and 1.1.1.1.2.1 into fred.c $ cvs commit -m "merge fred_1 fixes" cvs commit: Examining . Checking in fred.c; /omz13/prj/fred/fred.c,v <-- fred.c new revision: 1.1.1.1.4.1; previous revision: 1.1.1.1 done