update -j -kk (was RE: [cvsnt] Re: Corrupted Word Doc)
davidh at netacquire.com
Thu Apr 28 04:52:07 BST 2005
> Glen Starrett wrote:
> > I certainly agree there should be some better solution, but I don't
> > know
> > what it is. Falling back to the "it's not recommended to commit
> > binaries" doesn't really work in practice in a lot of cases.
> > Tony, do you have some recommendation for this?
> The code does an implicit -kk where necessary but this
> doesn't work in
> all cases (mostly due to the way the files are stored). -k-v
> might work
> but it likely to have some of the same issues.
I obviously don't understand the intracacies of what's being done in the
code so forgive me if the following comment seems naïve. Specifically, why
is it not just sufficient to *ignore* the -kk behaviour for files that are
tagged as binary (i.e., added with -kb) in the repository? The result would
be exactly what I'd want in my mixed binary/text repository with an "update
> Ultimately the files are different and it's a lot harder than
> simple -k
> options... it may require a custom diff to be able to ignore certain
> differences (something I started working on but haven't done
> much with).
> cvsnt mailing list
> cvsnt at cvsnt.org http://www.cvsnt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cvsnt
More information about the cvsnt