[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: CVS update vs SVN update

From: Blair Zajac <blair_at_orcaware.com>
Date: 2006-01-22 21:28:22 CET

On Jan 22, 2006, at 5:33 AM, Karl Auer wrote:

> This is probably a really silly question, but why exactly does the
> SVN book tell ex-CVS users not to use update to see their changes?
> In Chapter Three, in the section "Basic work cycle", subsection
> "Examine your changes", there is a sidebar that says "You'll have
> to break the habit of using the update command to see what local
> modifications you've made".
> It seems to me that update does pretty much the same thing in both
> CVS and SVN - integrates HEAD (or some specified version) into the
> working directory.
> Or does the book just mean that since you can do it without
> involving the repository, you should? It's a pretty emphatic
> statement if that's the only reason...
> Regards, K.

The reasons most people ran 'cvs update' was that it was an easy way
to see what changed in your working copy. Running 'cvs status' was
hard to parse. The problem with running 'cvs update' is that you
pull in changes into your working copy that you may not want to deal
with yet (although you will have to deal with them when you want to
commit). So if you just want to see what's changed, run 'svn status'
and/or 'svn diff'.


Blair Zajac, Ph.D.
CTO, OrcaWare Technologies
Subversion training, consulting and support
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Jan 22 21:29:48 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.