[cvsnt] Re: Incompatibility with "plain" CVS server?

[Johan Holmberg]

Tony Hoyle <tmh at nodomain.org> writes:
>
> > - What role does the "_H_" play in CVSNT?
>
> It's used mostly server-side to handle directory versioning... it
> exists for a fraction of a second between two operations (predirectory
> and directory callbacks).  The client also uses it in some
> circumstances but for much less.  It does not exist on files and is
> never written to the RCS files, and is never sent over the protocol.
>

Thanks for the reply.
I think I have made some progress in understanding the problem today.
I have been able to talk to the developer, and test things on his
client computer.

On the computer of the developer (Windows XP, TortoiseCVS and CVSNT),
in the existing "CVS sandbox" I did:

    $ cvs version
    Client: Concurrent Versions System (CVSNT) 2.0.58d (client/server)
    Server: Concurrent Versions System (CVS) 1.11.13 (client/server)
    $
    $ echo 111 > underscore_h_test.txt
    $
    $ cvs add underscore_h_test.txt
    cvs add: scheduling file `underscore_h_test.txt' for addition \
             on branch `B041122:_H_'
    cvs add: use 'cvs commit' to add this file permanently
    $ cvs commit -mjust-a-test underscore_h_test.txt
    RCS file: /cvs/src/abe/Attic/underscore_h_test.txt,v
    done
    Checking in underscore_h_test.txt;
    /cvs/src/abe/Attic/underscore_h_test.txt,v  <-- underscore_h_test.txt
    new revision: 1.1.2.1; previous revision: 1.1
    done
    $
    $ cat CVS/Tag
    TB041122:_H_
    $

And then on the CVS-server:

    $ head -19 /cvs/src/abe/Attic/underscore_h_test.txt,v
    head    1.1;
    access;
    symbols
            B041122:_H_:1.1.0.2;
    locks; strict;
    comment @# @;


    1.1
    date    2005.02.07.09.06.36;    author fredrikh;        state dead;
    branches
            1.1.2.1;
    next    ;

    1.1.2.1
    date    2005.02.07.09.06.36;    author fredrikh;        state Exp;
    branches;
    next    ;

    $

The things I found interesting above are:

- the "Tag" files in the "CVS sandbox" on the client computer contain
  the string "TB041122:_H_". The name we gave to the branch when
  creating it was "B041122".
  The project under CVS-control consists of about 150 directories.  In
  the "CVS sandbox" all of them have a "CVS/Tag" file looking like
  "TB041122:_H_".

- when a new file is added on the branch, the ":_H_" slips through to
  the server and ends up in the newly created archive file.


The things I wonder now are:

- under what circumstances are the "_H_" written to the "CVS/Tag" files
  on the client side?

- is it OK for the "CVS/Tag" files to contain "_H_", and what does it
  mean in that case?


/Johan Holmberg