| From: | "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | anoncvs and diff |
| Date: | 2002-10-03 09:49:10 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0210031043100.26902-100000@ponder.fairway2k.co.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I've been waiting to see how a patched file differs from my version.
The patch was added to the to apply list last week I think (it wasn't mine btw)
and I've been doing cvs diff to view the differences so I can tell when the
patch has been applied. Additional information given by this is the revision
number the comparison is against of course. This has stayed at 1.61 all the
time I've been doing this cvs diff operation. Looking at the web interface to
cvs I see the file has a revision number of 1.64. I use the anoncvs server for
my operations. Am I being daft or is there a problem with the anoncvs archive?
--
Nigel J. Andrews
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Manfred Koizar | 2002-10-03 10:40:20 | Re: Correlation in cost_index() |
| Previous Message | Mario Weilguni | 2002-10-03 08:56:10 | Re: (Fwd) Re: Any Oracle 9 users? A test please... |