Subject: Re: Lots of conflicts while updating src
To: None <netbsd-users@netbsd.org>
From: Andrew Brown <atatat@atatdot.net>
List: netbsd-users
Date: 10/25/2001 12:01:18
>OK now that I've got the cvs/ssh source updates working, I am seeing
>some disturbing results from CVS.
>
>A large number of the files are skipped or updated as appropriate;
>however, I also have _tons_ of these messages (hundreds at least):
>
>cvs update: move away src/usr.bin/banner/Makefile; it is in the way
>C src/usr.bin/banner/Makefile
>cvs update: move away src/usr.bin/banner/banner.1; it is in the way
>C src/usr.bin/banner/banner.1
>cvs update: move away src/usr.bin/banner/banner.c; it is in the way
>C src/usr.bin/banner/banner.c
>
>The cvs man page says that those are Conflicts, and that the old file
>will be renamed and the new one put in its place.  That would be fine.

they're not the same kind of conflicts.  the type of conflicts where
cvs renames the file and gets a new one are where there are changes in
the file that cvs can't resolve (or merge) with changes to the files
from the repository.

these "conflicts" seem to be a result of files in your tree that cvs
doesn't think are under its control.  this probably also means that
when you're updating, you're getting the main trunk, or -current code.

>But what I am seeing is that the date and time on those files are not
>recent; so, it appears as though it is leaving the old file in place.

yes, all it does is complain about it.

>I would hate to rebuild the system with a bestial mix of old and new
>code; I would also hate to have to repeat the src update 50 times until
>I figure out what the problem is, as I am on a dialup. :((

i'd probably suggest the following

(1) cvs update the tree and save the output of cvs to a file.
(2) clean up your tree by doing

	grep '^C ' update.output |
		sed 's/^C //' |
		xargs rm

(3) update the tree again

it's not the most amazingly efficient way of doing it, but it's not 50
updates.  :)

>Is the above normal, or should I really go in there and move every
>single one of those files (a huge chore)?  And if so, why tf didn't cvs
>deal with this as advertised in the man page?

it's advertising something different.

-- 
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org             * "ah!  i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"
andrew@crossbar.com       * "information is power -- share the wealth."