On 22/10/2011 18:29, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2011, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I tried following:
>>
>> (1) Run svnversion in non-svn directory:
>>
>> return status == 0
>> prints out "exported"
>>
>> time:
>> real0m0.043s
>> user0m0.000s
>> sys 0m0.045s
On 24/10/2011 14:59, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Saturday, October 22, 2011 12:31:25 pm Luchesar V. ILIEV wrote:
>> Speaking of that, and in the context of the recursion that svnversion
>> does, something else comes to my mind...
>>
>> svnversion is currently execut
On 11/11/2011 20:33, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
>>
>> Dear all ,
>>>
>>> Instead of using Current and then renaming everything for a new version
>>> number ,
>>> is it not possible
On 11/11/2011 21:07, Luchesar V. ILIEV wrote:
> On 11/11/2011 20:33, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all ,
>>>>
>
On 18/11/2011 12:53, Thomas Mueller wrote:
>> If you would like to use csup/cvsup mechanisms to access the source
>> tree the branch tag to use is now "RELENG_9_0", if you use "." (head)
>> you will get 10-CURRENT. If you would like to access the source tree
>> via SVN it is "svn://svn.freebsd.org
On 18/11/2011 18:21, George Kontostanos wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Luchesar V. ILIEV
> wrote:
>> On 18/11/2011 12:53, Thomas Mueller wrote:
>>>> If you would like to use csup/cvsup mechanisms to access the source
>>>> tree the branch tag to
