Re: CVS doesn't like its own checkouts???

[Gleef <gleef capital net>]

On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Jonathan Sergent wrote:
> In message <199812181737.MAA03403@ECE.CMU.EDU>, "Brandon S. Allbery" writes:
>  ] Invariably when updating ORBit, gnome-libs, and gnome-core (the ones with 
>  ] the sticky tags) I must remove the modules and re-checkout them; 
>  ] otherwise, every single file in each module gets "move away <file>; it 
>  ] is in the way".  IOW if 
>  ] I sticky-tag it it doesn't want me to ever update it.  :-(
>  ] 
>  ] This is with the latest CVS I can find (1.10.4), newly updated after 
>  ] this kept 
>  ] happening with 1.10.2 and I followed the usual suggestion to upgrade 
>  ] everything in sight.
> 
> This doesn't happen to me with the cvs-1.10.2-1 RPM from RH 5.2.
> What command are you using for update?

I don't know about the original poster, but I have been getting the same
problem often (but not consistantly) with many versions of CVS, starting
with whatever version was shipped with RedHat 5.0 (I think that was
1.8.something), right up to the CVS 1.10 I'm running at home and the CVS
1.10.3 I'm running at work.


> IIRC, I'm doing this:
> 
> cd blah; cvs co gnome
> 
> then to get the stable libs and core,
> 
> cd blah/gnome; cvs up -r GNOME_STABLE gnome-libs gnome-core

It's been happening since long before GNOME_STABLE has been a tag, but so
far my commands pretty much match yours.  I only see it during a checkout
of an existing module, but as included modules come and go, one has to
recheckout regularly to catch the new modules.


> then for future updates,
> 
> cd blah/gnome; cvs up -Pd .
> 
> The "-d" is important to get macros, support, etc.
> 
> More importantly, which CVS server are you using?  A good deal of the 
> work is done on the server side IIRC.  An off version there might cause 
> problems.  I'm using va.debian.org; it's just 12ms pings away from my 
> bedroom.

I'm using the general anoncvs.gnome.org at home, and I have work set
(temporarily) to grab from va.debian.org specifically.  As far as I can
tell, it happens with all of the anonymous CVS servers, and used to happen
with the primary CVS server back when that was the source of anonymous
access.

-Gleef