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.
It's interesting that "cvs status -q" is all but undocumented. Most of information on Google is about issues, not about using it. I'll give it a whirl, but I still dislike the fact that it doesn't support -I!. If there are ANY files in my source tree that aren't part of the source, I want to know about it. They should not be there. The only people that think that having the ? in front of EXEs and DLLs is clutter are people that build into their source tree. This is a bad practice that is only due to people who use Visual Studio (which builds into the source tree by default) and can't be bothered to set it up to build into an output tree. Essentially it's the same people that will use Visual Source Safe rather than setting up CVS, because it comes by default with Visual Studio. Both practices work fine for tiny projects; neither scales at all. chuck Tony Hoyle wrote: > Chuck Kirschman wrote: > >> "cvs -nq up" has been the time-honored way of determining which files >> are changed in cvs. I'm surprised that Tony desupported it. The >> lucky coincidence is that it still works for now, and is much easier >> to use with regex's and other commands. > > > -n up hasn't worked properly for years.. status -q has been around a bit > longer and has basically replaced it except for a couple of corner cases > (that haven't been mentioned in living memory so I assume nobody's that > bothered about them). The official deprecation is a bit newer because > it became clear that making it work was not only nontrivial (involving > essentially rewriting parts of the update process in dummy form) it > seemed nobody had even noticed how broken it actually was... > > > Is "cvs -q stat -qq" everyone's > > preferred way to look at the change set now? > > If you want changeset information then log can filter on commit and bug > identifiers. > >> One other problem with that command is that it misses DLLs, EXEs, etc. >> Update at least supports -I! so you can see these files. I have no idea > > > If you're after the list of changed files then I don't see what listing > DLLs and EXEs that aren't under CVS control is going to do for you... no > cvs command is going to do that since it basically ignores things that > it doesn't know about, other than printing the questionmark (personally > I hate that.. clutters the output). > > Tony