From: Andrew Hart <ahart_at_dim.uchile.cl>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:24:08 -0400

Manuel,

Thanks heaps for that info. I must have been having a bad day. I
should have twigged to -r and -D options to the update command.

Cheers,
Andrew.

At 19:03 12-04-2006, you wrote:
>On 4/13/06, Andrew Hart <ahart_at_dim.uchile.cl> wrote:
> > 1. How do I determine the revision number/date-time of the working
> > copy I have got currently checked out? I imagine each file has its
> > own revision number/date-time stamp, but I want to determine the most
> > recent one.
>
>umm, let's see.
>'cvs status' gives you couples of information about each selected
>file, including the working revision and the repository revision, but
>neither of them show the newest repository revision. (I tested rolling
>back to an elder revision. This got me a sticky tag, but now I can't
>see if there is a newer version on the server. Maybe you can if the
>version changes on the server before you update (and without stickies,
>of course)
>If you need that for scripting, you can get it with 'cvs log'
>It shows the servers newest revision on one of the first lines, called
>"head". (Head means no branch, don't know if that's the same for svn).
>
> > 2. How can I revert my working copy back to a particular revision
> > number or date-time?
>
>ah, that's an easy one:
>'cvs up -rRevision' or 'cvs up -DDate' (I think it does not matter if
>you do a blank between the option -r/-D and the actual identifier).
>But, it set's this "filter" as sticky, so a normal update afterwards
>(even on the whole directory) will not get you the newest version, but
>the stuck one. To get rid of stickies: 'cvs up -A'
>If you want to revert to the newest avaiable repository-version, 'cvs
>up -C' will get a clean copy.
>
>For a "normal" update, I strongly recommend to do 'cvs up -Pd': It
>creates new directories if something new's been added and it deletes
>empty directories if they've been purged.
>
>uh, wait. double-check the things I've been saying. I was referring to
>cvsnt, not cvs, altough the differences should be small.
>
>hth, ~lImbus
Received on 2006-04-17