From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 07:40:09 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: Eugene Surovegin Cc: linuxppc-dev Subject: Re: Bitkeeper changeset numbering glitch in 2_4_devel tree Message-ID: <20020728074009.D9612@work.bitmover.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020727122936.02ababf0@pop.prodigy.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020727122936.02ababf0@pop.prodigy.net>; from ebs@innocent.com on Sat, Jul 27, 2002 at 12:48:32PM -0700 Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: > What today shows up as changeset 1.1155 may in future become something like > 1.1088.1.30. I'm sure that Bitkeeper uses other way of identification > internally but it's not user accessible. The internal names are called keys or inodes and you get at them with bk prs -hr -nd:KEY: In general, anywhere you can use a revision, you may use a key instead. Nt in BK/web yet though. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/