Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
Tony Hoyle wrote:
> Daniel Lapolla wrote:
>
>> Yes, it works fine for merging. But I do not want to merge the
>> branche, I want to retrieve the branch, and I'm unable to update a
>> file that is scheduled for adition (after the merge) back to its
>> branch. The only thing I got in that situation is: cvs server:
>> warning: new-born newfile.txt has disappeared!
>>
> Are you saying you're adding the file then attempting to merge a branch
> onto it? That's just completely backwards.. cvs is doing exactly what
> you're telling it to do, since the file doesn't exist on the branch (and
> no revision exists on the server to conflict with) it deletes it.
>
> Tony
No. I'm trying to create a working copy containing HEAD + br_cr_12345.
Imagine that I added newfile.txt directly in br_cr_12345:
newfile.txt
+ - - +
| 1.1 |------ br_cr_12345
+ - - + |
(dead) +---------+
| 1.1.2.1 |
+---------+
newfile.txt is located inside a directory with several other files that
do NOT have tha branch "br_cr_12345".
I need to retrieve this directory in a way that all other files are in
the HEAD revision, and newfile.txt is in the last revision of the branch
"br_cr_12345" with the branch sticky tag.
What we used to do (when our server was 2.5.01.1910):
1. update -A -C -j br_cr_12345
2. the resulting working copy contains now all files @ HEAD plus
newfile.txt scheduled for addition.
3. update -A -C -r br_cr_12345 newfile.txt
4. the resulting working copy contains all the files @ HEAD, except for
newfile.txt that is @ br_cr_12345.
The problem is: since we updated our server to 2.5.01.1976, step 3
returns this message: cvs server: warning: new-born newfile.txt has
disappeared.
Daniel