Re: Tracking CVS

From: Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 22, 2006, 14:17 UTC
Message-ID: <9e4733910606220717of2ba299ta8a38c7d63fd5635@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060622135831.GB21864@pasky.or.cz>

On 6/22/06, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote:

Show 33 quoted lines

> Dear diary, on Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 02:41:16PM CEST, I got a letter
> where Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com> said that...
> > I'm tracking cvs using this sequence.
> >
> > cvs update
> > cg rm -a
> > cg commit
> > cg add -r .
> > cg commit
> >
> > Is there a way to avoid the two commits? If you do the add with out
> > the intervening commit it just adds the files back.
>
> I think the most straightforward way is:
>
>         cvs update
>         cg-rm -a
>         cg-status -wns \? | xargs cg-add
>         cg-commit
>
> If you want to be careful about filenames polluted by non-newline
> whitespaces,
>
>         cg-status -wns \? | tr '\n' '\0' | xargs -0 cg-add
>
> If you want to be safe even with filenames containing newlines, you need
> to go at the Git level:
>
>         git-ls-files -z --others | \
>                 xargs -0 git-update-index --add --
>
> Perhaps we might make a special command which would sync the index set
> with the working copy set...

How about a cg-sync? Tracking cvs (or other SCM) with git is probably a common activitiy while you try to convince the other CVS users to switch. It is probably worth a little write up in the readme on the best way to do it.

cg-sync should probably default to having a prompt before actually adding/removing the files. Add a -f or something to get rid of the prompt.

-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@gmail.com