> On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 08:37:20AM +0900, itojun@iijlab.net wrote:
> > >>> > > 	i'm not aware of the "interoperability issue".  any pointers?
> > >>> > > 	(i have no problem using cvs 1.11.10 against cvs.netbsd.org)
> > >
> > >	http://mail-index.netbsd.org/netbsd-users/2003/12/05/0007.html
> > 
> > 	1st problem on the email is caused by using NetBSD libz for compression
> > 	for cvs, not the zlib.c comes with cvs (the error message on the email
> > 	"incomplete dynamic bit lengths tree" appears in lib/libz, not in
> > 	gnu/dist/cvs).
> 
> Actually, I believe the problem actually appeared early in 1.11, is a
> general version incompatibility in CVS when compression is in use, no matter
> what the zlib provider is, and that NetBSD zlib is simply providing a
> better diagnostic message.  It may be fixed in 1.11.10; I know that I was
> sent a copy of the commit message for the fix in the CVS CVS tree...

	as far as i see there's no real diff between 1.11.5 and 1.11.10 wrt
	calls to zlib; i'm interested in seeing that commit message.  anyways,
	if there's fix to cvs-to-zlib call in between 1.11.5 to 1.11.10,
	why do i have to be blamed publically for upgrading thirdparty software?
	i'm fixing bugs and get blamed.  it's not fair.

itojun