From: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Include file in regress.c |
Date: | 2006-09-22 11:09:42 |
Message-ID: | 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA356F7@algol.sollentuna.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> > Strangely, if I try to do a "cvs add gram.c", it fails with cvs
> add:
> > `gram.c' added independently by second party I don't know what
> this
> > means. (Why "second party" and not "third party"?). Even if I
> delete
> > gram.c. Even if I remove it from .cvsignore.
>
> I think "cvs add" probably contacts the server, because I seem to
> recall that it gives different output depending on whether the file
> already exists on another branch, and there's no way to tell that
> from your local working directory contents.
>
> The CVS history for gram.c looks a bit confused:
> http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/parser
> /Attic/gram.c
> How did revisions 2.89 and 2.90 come into existence when the file
> was already cvs-removed? This may be confusing the server too.
That definitely looks weird to me. Unfortunatly, it's way above me wrt
CVS knowledge. I'm just going to have to live with it and remember to
delete that part from my diffs... (It's not so hard, because it's
several megabytes each time, and I don't normally produce patches that
large..)
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2006-09-22 11:37:07 | Re: pg_upgrade: downgradebility |
Previous Message | Joachim Wieland | 2006-09-22 11:06:35 | Timezone doc patch |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-09-22 14:02:33 | Re: WIP: Hierarchical Queries - stage 1 |
Previous Message | Joachim Wieland | 2006-09-22 11:06:35 | Timezone doc patch |