From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1637 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2002 16:24:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 1605 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2002 16:24:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.cygnus.com) (24.114.42.213) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Jan 2002 16:24:34 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.cygnus.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C2DB3F0E; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:24:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3C4C40B7.2070803@cygnus.com> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 08:24:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.7) Gecko/20020103 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Brian Youmans <3diff@gnu.org>, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [Fwd: Cron sh $HOME/ss/do-all-gdb-snapshots] References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00235.txt.bz2 > What am I missing? Probably nothing. I agree, CVS can be pretty counter intuitive. > One of the things I can never remember is when do you have to use the > "-r TAG" switch with CVS commands issued on the branch. So I tend to > always use that switch, which is perhaps incorrect with "cvs add". CVS should see that the directory is on a branch and remember to add new files to that same branch. There were definitly bugs on this (I remember being tripped my self a few years back and that led to a bug fix). You're sequence likely ticked another of them and sccrambled the contents of the CVS directory. All I did was: cvs add foo cvs commit in my 5.1 tree. >> Should the FDL and ``Free Software Needs Free Documentation'' blurbs be >> added to the GDB Internals Manual? > > > I asked Richard Stallman, and he replied that it's okay to have only > one FDL in a collection of documents that are distributed together. > The same situation exists with Emacs, so we are in a good company ;-) M'kay. >> Also, should the main GDB manual include a printed copy of the GPL. > > > I don't know. In general, GDB is considered one of the few > ``important packages'' that are part of GNU software, so having the > GPL in the manual is probably a good idea. GCC, for example, does > have such a section. And we even have a section for it ("Free > Software"), which now just tells what the GPL is. Ok. Andrew