Re: Linux 2.4 and BitKeeper

[Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com>]

On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 01:39:52AM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On March 15, 2002 07:47 pm, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > Here's the deal.  I know you guys all think that I'm a genius and
> > everything, but I'm actually dumb as a board.  The "design mistake"
> > was made so that I could have BK generate pure SCCS files and test that
> > I did the same thing as a known working tool, ATT SCCS.  By doing that,
> > I easily saved myself a year of design.  Making interleaved deltas work
> > is hard for me (we have Rick here now and he's forgotten more about this
> > stuff than I'll ever know, but we didn't have him when I wrote the SCCS
> > compat weave).
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > I'm gonna hack at least make & patch to know about the new format and
> > work the way they do now.  So I can have your cake and eat it too.
> > If I can't get the FSF to take the changes, we'll just ship 'em,
> > we ship diff & patch already, so it's not so hard to alias make='bk make'.
> 
> While you're in there, is there any way I can have an option to have the
> 'shouting' SCCS become .SCCS or something, so a normal listing just shows
> the files I'm interested in?
> 

It seems like once all of the bk information is kept in one file per
repository that the one file can be named something like .bk.db or something
like that and thus fix the problem you're having...