From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20083 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2002 09:57:28 -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 20050 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2002 09:57:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Jan 2002 09:57:27 -0000 Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA16994; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 11:56:38 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 01:57:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz@is To: Andrew Cagney cc: Brian Youmans <3diff@gnu.org>, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [Fwd: Cron sh $HOME/ss/do-all-gdb-snapshots] In-Reply-To: <3C4B989F.4070603@cygnus.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00231.txt.bz2 On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote: > FYI, you were right, CVS doesn't like you! :=) Probably my fault, at least to some extent, but my opinion that the CVS has several counter-intuitive aspects in its UI has until now fallen on deaf ears (yes, I actually spoke to some of the CVS developers and was told that I didn't understand ``the CVS way''). Anyway, how do you add a new file on a branch? What happened to me is that I had no problems with "cvs add" on the trunk, followed by "cvs ci" on the trunk. On the branch, I think I mistakenly typed "cvs ci" first, without having fdl.texi present in the directory, and was told that ``a newly born fdl.texi disappeared''. I then remembered that I missed "cvs add" and did that, only to be told that ``someone else already added it''. After that, "cvs ci" refused to work, demanding that I do "cvs add" first... What am I missing? 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". > 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 ;-) > 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.