Re: `cvs' version problem? (was Re: CVS compilation problems...)

[John R Sheets <dusk smsi-roman com>]

Raja R Harinath wrote:

> Anything that puts one or more of macros/, intl/, or libvfs/ at the same
> level as gnome-libs is wrong.
>
> Other variants for testing should be obvious from this.  A smaller
> module (like gedit, ee, or gnome-print) may be more preferable for
> testing.

I'm running cvs 1.9 from rpm, and I've noticed that it seems to act a little
inconsistent about which level it tries to put macros/ etc in, depending on
which module I'm checking out, even with a fresh checkout.  If I recall
properly, cvs put macros/ in the right place for ee, but not for gnome-libs,
gnome-network, and maybe a couple other packages.

I don't know if this has anything at all to do with it, but it did seem that
generally, the modules that worked properly had a CVS/Entries.Log file, while
the ones that cvs messed up on didn't have that file.  Maybe I'm totally off
base here.  I haven't had the opportunity to test this further.

What is the Entries.Log file used for, anyway?  I couldn't find it in the CVS
docs.

Thanks,
John