[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: binary files bad idea? why?
From: |
Spiro Trikaliotis |
Subject: |
Re: binary files bad idea? why? |
Date: |
Mon, 24 May 2004 08:25:28 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6i |
Hello,
* On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 09:50:13AM -0400 Jim.Hyslop wrote:
> Spiro Trikaliotis wrote:
> > This is no problem from my experience if the initial check-in was
> > done from a Unix (LF-) based system, but it is a problem if it was
> > done from a DOS (CR/LF-) based system.
> There is also a remote possibility that the binary file might _happen_
> to contain what CVS thinks is a keyword, such as $Id$. Chances are
> pretty slim, but it _could_ happen.
Well, since CVS handles these keywords on checkout, not on commit, this
should not be a problem: Just change the file to binary ("cvs admin
-kb") and do an update ("cvs update"), and you have the original file
again.
Best regards,
Spiro.
--
Spiro R. Trikaliotis I'm subscribed to the mailing lists I'm posting,
http://www.trikaliotis.net/ so please refrain from Cc:ing me. Thank you.
- binary files bad idea? why?, marko, 2004/05/19
- RE: binary files bad idea? why?, Fouts Christopher (), 2004/05/19
- RE: binary files bad idea? why?, Jim.Hyslop, 2004/05/19
- RE: binary files bad idea? why?, Christopher.Fouts, 2004/05/19
- RE: binary files bad idea? why?, address@hidden, 2004/05/19
- RE: binary files bad idea? why?, Jim.Hyslop, 2004/05/20
- Re: binary files bad idea? why?,
Spiro Trikaliotis <=
- Re: binary files bad idea? why?, Pierre Asselin, 2004/05/20
- RE: binary files bad idea? why?, Jim.Hyslop, 2004/05/21