Steve Kemp wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Dave Glowacki wrote:
> > So both Daniel and Steve think it's silly to use a standard
> > command to get the status of your repository, and that it's
> > better to write a script to parse the output of a different
> > command and to rewrite that script when you find yourself
> > on a machine where you've forgotten to copy your script?
> No, I don't think its silly.
OK, sorry for the accusation :-)
> What I think is silly is having to perform an update to
> see what you've changed.
> It should be possible to see a list of the files you've got
> which are different than the corresponding files in the repository,
> _without_ having to merge - and potentially get conflicts from.
So do you want something similar to 'cvs -n update' or are
you thinking of something totally different?
> > In case it wasn't obvious, I use 'cvs update' to find out
> > which files have been modified. It gives me a nice, concise
> > summary of everything without my having to tweak anything.
> It does, but it _could_ give you merge conflicts, and break a
> build, for example.
It *could* on occasion, but that happens to me so rarely that
I don't even worry about it.
If I am worried about it, I use '-n' and if I forget and get a
conflict, I just figure that it's a problem I'd have run into
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:12 2006