[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Linux 2.4 bitkeeper repository
On Fri, 22 Feb 2002, Larry McVoy wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 05:35:13PM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > You forgot about setting the proper BK_USER, BK_HOST and
> > > 'bk comment' commands ;)
> >
> > heh. Those are rather new things, aren't they? :) Anyhow, the goal for
> > these tree(s) is to keep the PPC children trees up to date.
> BK_USER, BK_HOST have been around forever but their use is discouraged for
> the following reason: BK is a distributed system, we need unique names for
> things, and the user&host are part of the name we make up.
> bk comments is new and a darned useful thing, too, I'm glad Linus asked
> for it. You just have to read the man page and realize that your updates
> to the comments may not propogate.

Larry, i've a question for you.
Does BK use the same basic algos of diff+patch ?
Or, if CVS fails a merge, what is the probability that BK will succeed on
the same op ?

- Davide

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.071 / U:10.140 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site