From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Molenda To: scottb@netwinder.org, hjl@lucon.org, nickc@redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: src/ltcf-c.sh Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 18:21:00 -0000 Message-id: <20000905182042.A7301@shell17.ba.best.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-09/msg00045.html I haven't been following this thread, but... scottb> Actually on further testing, it gets me the file on checkout, but not scottb> on an update. hjl> You have to use checkout on binutils and gdb. It isn't all that horrible. A 'checkout' will act like an update if the tree is already populated by files. If you normally do % cd /somewhere/src % cvs update do this instead: % cd /somewhere % cvs -d :pserver:anoncvs@anoncvs.cygnus.com:/cvs/src co gdb % cvs -d :pserver:anoncvs@anoncvs.cygnus.com:/cvs/src co binutils and you'll see it pulling over only the new/updated files/directories in to your tree. It is a bit less efficient to use a checkout instead of an update. The update will send deltas (patches) over the wire to update your work area, whereas a checkout sends the files in their entirety. In either case, compressing the cvs operation is always a good idea. Add the '-z9' command line option directly after 'cvs', or put cvs -q -z9 in your $HOME/.cvsrc. Jason PS- If you guys are talking about a file in the top-level directory, then a checkout is not necessary, an update will pick it up. The only thing an update won't get you are newly created directories. If an update _isn't_ getting some file, I'd look over your CVS/Entries file in that directory to see if there might be something in there that is confusing cvs. This behavior does not sound correct.