bitkeeper changesets

bitkeeper changesets

[Brian Kuschak]

Has something wierd happened to
bk://ppc.bkbits.net/linuxppc_2_4_devel recently?

I'm using the BK changeset versions for tracking when
I export specific BK trees into my local
source-control system.  The last one I imported was
2.4.19-final (changeset 1.1114 on 08-02-2002).  Today
I did a 'bk pull', and noticed that that changeset
revision no longer exists in BK!  And it seems the one
I exported previously is now named 1.1091.1.23.

Also, it seems like older versions (earlier than
29-May-2002) are no longer available in BK.

Am I missing something here, or did the version
numbers really change?  And why?  Should I be using a
different BK server?

Thanks,
Brian


Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

RE: bitkeeper changesets

[Allen Curtis]

> I'm using the BK changeset versions for tracking when
> I export specific BK trees into my local
> source-control system.  The last one I imported was
> 2.4.19-final (changeset 1.1114 on 08-02-2002).  Today
> I did a 'bk pull', and noticed that that changeset
> revision no longer exists in BK!  And it seems the one
> I exported previously is now named 1.1091.1.23.
>
> Also, it seems like older versions (earlier than
> 29-May-2002) are no longer available in BK.
>
> Am I missing something here, or did the version
> numbers really change?  And why?  Should I be using a
> different BK server?

I see the same thing. It looks like the tag changed to just v2.4.19. The BK
revisions totally changed!


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: bitkeeper changesets

[Tom Rini]

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 10:05:30PM -0700, Allen Curtis wrote:
>
> > I'm using the BK changeset versions for tracking when
> > I export specific BK trees into my local
> > source-control system.  The last one I imported was
> > 2.4.19-final (changeset 1.1114 on 08-02-2002).  Today
> > I did a 'bk pull', and noticed that that changeset
> > revision no longer exists in BK!  And it seems the one
> > I exported previously is now named 1.1091.1.23.
> >
> > Also, it seems like older versions (earlier than
> > 29-May-2002) are no longer available in BK.
> >
> > Am I missing something here, or did the version
> > numbers really change?  And why?  Should I be using a
> > different BK server?
>
> I see the same thing. It looks like the tag changed to just v2.4.19. The BK
> revisions totally changed!

Revision numbers are not constant.  BK keys are.  'bk help key2rev'.

--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

RE: bitkeeper changesets

[Allen Curtis]

>
> Revision numbers are not constant.  BK keys are.  'bk help key2rev'.

What about the changed TAG name?

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: bitkeeper changesets

[Tom Rini]

On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 07:42:41AM -0700, Allen Curtis wrote:
>
> >
> > Revision numbers are not constant.  BK keys are.  'bk help key2rev'.
>
> What about the changed TAG name?

TAG names don't change.  If you can verify that it did indeed change
somehow, it's a bug and you should talk to Larry / BitMover support.

--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

RE: bitkeeper changesets

[Curtis, Allen]

>> I see the same thing. It looks like the tag changed to just
>v2.4.19. The
>BK
>> revisions totally changed!
>
>Revision numbers are not constant.  BK keys are.  'bk help key2rev'.

Re: linuxppc-2_4_devel

According to my notes, the BK repository was:
rev:	1.1114
tag:	2.4.19final

Now the tag is v2.4.19 with a comment saying automerge to 2.4.19final.

What happened?


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: bitkeeper changesets

[Brian Kuschak]

--- Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> Revision numbers are not constant.  BK keys are.
> 'bk help key2rev'.
>

So I assume this is the correct way of getting a
unique, unchanging revision key corresponding to a
particular ChangeSet:

   bk changes -r1.1091.1.23 -nd:KEY:
   or
   bk prs -r1.1091.1.23 -nd:KEY:

   ======== ChangeSet 1.1091.1.23 ========
   paulus@samba.org|ChangeSet|20020803062658|55132

This changeset removes the -rc5 from EXTRAVERSION in
the top-level Makefile.  But I can't I convert this
key back to the revision number:

echo "paulus@samba.org|ChangeSet|20020803062658|55132"
|bk key2rev Makefile

Can't find
paulus@samba.org|ChangeSet|20020803062658|55132 in
SCCS/s.Makefile

Thanks,
Brian


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: bitkeeper changesets

[Tom Rini]

On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 10:26:46AM -0700, Brian Kuschak wrote:

>
> --- Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> > Revision numbers are not constant.  BK keys are.
> > 'bk help key2rev'.
> >
>
> So I assume this is the correct way of getting a
> unique, unchanging revision key corresponding to a
> particular ChangeSet:
>
>    bk changes -r1.1091.1.23 -nd:KEY:
>    or
>    bk prs -r1.1091.1.23 -nd:KEY:
>
>    ======== ChangeSet 1.1091.1.23 ========
>    paulus@samba.org|ChangeSet|20020803062658|55132
>
> This changeset removes the -rc5 from EXTRAVERSION in
> the top-level Makefile.  But I can't I convert this
> key back to the revision number:
>
> echo "paulus@samba.org|ChangeSet|20020803062658|55132"
> |bk key2rev Makefile
>
> Can't find
> paulus@samba.org|ChangeSet|20020803062658|55132 in
> SCCS/s.Makefile

You want to do:
echo "paulus@samba.org|ChangeSet|20020803062658|55132" | bk key2rev ChangeSet

It confused me the first time too. :)

--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/