From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KYQCz-0008Je-It for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:57:33 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4FE40E0252; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:57:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from yx-out-1718.google.com (yx-out-1718.google.com [74.125.44.156]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E9C9E0252 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:57:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yx-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 4so1399yxp.46 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:57:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.33.1 with SMTP id l1mr422566waj.228.1219863450415; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:57:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.156.6 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:57:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:57:30 -0700 From: "Alec Warner" Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Usages of CVS $Header$ keyword in ebuilds - use cases wanted In-Reply-To: <20080827173802.GI27338@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080826204036.GE30560@curie-int.orbis-terrarum.net> <20080826154107.373c7095@xdune.lan> <20080827163557.GH27338@gentoo.org> <20080827172857.GK30560@curie-int.orbis-terrarum.net> <20080827173802.GI27338@gentoo.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8cad7f665810b89f X-Archives-Salt: 76d67b4f-57b6-4e40-884e-d8282b61e389 X-Archives-Hash: 138eca890eac393f8957df255762f1d2 On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 27-08-2008 10:28:57 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 06:35:57PM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: >> > For that reason I'd pretty much prefer to keep the CVS Header in place, >> > unless there is a very good reason to remove it. >> As I wrote in the other thread, my reason for asking is that it's one of >> the things that doesn't have clear mapping in the Git world. As a side >> benefit, getting rid of it also makes the double-commit mess go away. > > For who is it a mess? Not for repoman users, I suppose, and everyone > should be using it, right? As the one who personally played with the > code in repoman that determines whether or not the "double commit" is > necessary, I think it's mostly a repoman internal problem. The commit > script problems put aside. So you are saying we should do what? precompute the CVS header and inject it into $header$ ourselves take the checksums generate the manifest revert the $header$ change then commit the ebuild and manifest at once ? The only reason we have double commits right now is that the $header$ replacement is done by cvs at commit time so if we don't do two commits the checksums all break due to the substitution..how is that repoman's fault? > >> For your use case, it should be possible to just ask Git for updates to >> the given directory, and apply those to your own tree. > > Another VCS is another story. If we're switching, it would be nice if > the notion of overlays shadowing the main tree would be taken into > account. Especially since I don't think Prefix will "merge" any time > soon, but we are plagued by the thing called "growth". > > > -- > Fabian Groffen > Gentoo on a different level > >