[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Tagged branch not found

From: Vince Rice
Subject: RE: Tagged branch not found
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 17:23:37 -0500

Well, something is obviously wrong, because I have four *revisions* checked
in that I can check out by specific revision number, e.g. (I've removed the
comments to protect the guilty. :) )

date: 2002/06/26 19:44:05;  author: cvsuser;  state: Exp;  lines: +7 -8
date: 2002/03/06 20:45:58;  author: cvsuser;  state: Exp;  lines: +38 -42
date: 2002/03/06 20:45:15;  author: cvsuser;  state: Exp;  lines: +16 -3
date: 2002/03/06 20:43:48;  author: cvsuser;  state: Exp;  lines: +119 -38

As you noted, the rel-61303 *is* a revision tag, or at least intended to be.
The fact that it appears to be a branch tag is I'm sure another symptom of
the above problem.

Here's what's *supposed* to be true:  2.11 has a branch on it that has four
revisions, and HEAD continues with 2.12, 2.13...2.17.  I think I'll fix it
a.  checking out each of the above revisions and renaming them
b.  deleting each of the branch/revision tags below
c.  check out 2.11 as the working copy
d.  make a branch tag
e.  update the working copy to the branch (cvs update -r <branch>)
f.  Copy each of the above revisions over the working copy and re-check them

At that point I should have a good branch with four revisions, not four
mysterious branch/revisions.

Thanks for the help,


-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Jones [mailto:address@hidden
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 4:03 PM
To: Vince Rice
Cc: address@hidden
Subject: Re: Tagged branch not found

Vince Rice writes:
> Existing Tags:
>      rel-61303                       (revision: 2.17)
>      rel-61302                       (branch: 2.11.4)
>      post-nway-replication           (branch: 2.11.2)
>      prod                            (branch: 2.11.4)
> When I do a cvs co -r prod (or cvs co -r rel-61302) of the above file, I
> revision 2.11, not revision 2.11.4 (which shows up as in the
> $Header of the file). That isn't right is it? Shouldn't it give me the
> actual revision with the tag?

Yes, it's right.  2.11.4 is a *branch*, not a revision (branches have an
odd number of components, revisions have an even number of components),
so there isn't any revision with that number.  Revision 2.11 is the base
of the branch (or branch point), subsequent revisions on the branch
would be,, etc.  You haven't committed any new
revisions on the branch yet, so the base revision is the most recent
revision on the branch and that's what you get when you check out the

I'll note in passing that it seems from the above that the rel-61302 tag
was applied incorrectly -- it was probably intended to be a revision tag
like rel-61303, not a branch tag.

-Larry Jones

It's no fun to play games with a poor sport. -- Calvin

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]