Re: "Move file away, it is in the way" errors

[Paul Edwards]

"Derek Robert Price" <derek@ximbiot.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.1737.1066229445.21628.bug-cvs@gnu.org...
> |I did have enough interest to generate a patch that would at
> |least mark the file as a conflict, which in my opinion is a hell
> |of a lot better than the current behaviour.
> |
> |I submitted it with Changelog entry and sanity.sh already,
> |months ago.
>
> I think the general concensus was that your original patch wasn't enough
> of an enhancement to be worth the trouble.

There was no such consensus BEFORE I created the sanity.sh
test case.  IIRC the response to my patch was "you need to
submit a sanity.sh test case" not "we don't care about the
integrity hole that this patch would close".  I wouldn't have
bothered creating a sanity.sh test case if I'd known that such a
consensus existed.  That's the last thing I do.

> I simply thought you might
> have enough interest to update it.  The change should be fairly
> striaghtforward - you should just need to add a call to the the diff
> code which calls a two way diff using diff's if-then-else syntax to get
> the merge markers into the generated file.  It might be nice to check

This is all gobbledygook to me, I've not had any dealings with
such code, and last time I looked I couldn't find any easy way to
do it, but I did find a relatively easy way to mark the file as a
conflict, which is the change I made.

> If you don't have enough interest to generate the patch,

I had enough interest to generate a patch that I already submitted,
which closes an integrity hole in CVS.

In the meantime, the process used at work has a grep for
"has been added" which near-enough closes the hole for
our use.

BFN.  Paul.