On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 10:57:42AM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote: > On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 16:49 +0100, Gunther Nikl wrote: > > I retrieved gcc-2_95-branch from the svn repository and diffed it with > > my CVS checkout. The diff contained lots of differences. > > Many files had different CVS $Id strings. I was told that this is harmless > > but what is the reason for this difference? > > Because i didn't convert with cvs keyword substution on.
Ok, then its indeed harmless. > > However, there were a few files with different contents: > > > > diff -x .svn -x CVS -rup ../GCC2/config/mpw/ChangeLog > > GCC2/config/mpw/ChangeLog > > diff -x .svn -x CVS -rup ../GCC2/libio/fstream.h GCC2/libio/fstream.h > > diff -x .svn -x CVS -rup ../GCC2/libio/isgetsb.cc GCC2/libio/isgetsb.cc > > diff -x .svn -x CVS -rup ../GCC2/libio/isscan.cc GCC2/libio/isscan.cc > > diff -x .svn -x CVS -rup ../GCC2/libio/parsestream.h > > GCC2/libio/parsestream.h > > diff -x .svn -x CVS -rup ../GCC2/libio/stdstreams.cc > > GCC2/libio/stdstreams.cc > > diff -x .svn -x CVS -rup ../GCC2/libio/stream.h GCC2/libio/stream.h > > diff -x .svn -x CVS -rup ../GCC2/libio/strstream.h GCC2/libio/strstream.h > > > > Does that indicate a major problem for the svn repository for that branch? > > Not necessarily. > > The conversion is not perfect. It can't be, because we are trying to > recreate information we do not have. > > It is a heuristic to try to turn cvs commits into changesets. Sometimes > it will pull something a little too much forward or backwards, because > it happens to fall within the right group. Maybe I should add that I didn't retrieve the "latest" state but a specific date. The only change to that branch after that date bumping gcc/version.c. The differences in the above mentioned files are probably harmless (a ChangeLog and libio). > There is no perfection here, sorry. I didn't want to imply that. My mail was intended as in information and to take actions if required. Gunther
