cvs vs svn... (Re: SOURCES: ghostscript-afpl-am.patch (NEW), ghostscript-afpl-ijs_pkg...)

[Michal Moskal]

On 9/8/05, Jan Rekorajski <baggins at sith.mimuw.edu.pl> wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Sep 2005, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> 
> > On Thursday 08 of September 2005 20:27, Jakub Bogusz wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 08:29:06PM +0200, Paweł Sakowski wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 19:27 +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote:
> > > > > At the cost of keeping ALL tags/branches locally. You're joking.
> > > > >
> > > > > [baggins at sith rpm]$ du -hs SOURCES SPECS
> > > > > 959M    SOURCES
> > > > > 63M     SPECS
> > > >
> > > > Obviously svn makes no sense with such file organization (in two
> > > > directories). To allow reasonable branching, each package would have to
> > > > have a directory of its own. Which is a good idea anyway, but probably
> > > > it's not worth changing now.
> > >
> > > How would I make "cvs up SPECS" (without getting any SOURCES) then?
> > Not so easy as in cvs.
> >
> > for pkg in `svn ls http://.../packages/`; do
> >       do whatever you need
> > done
> 
> Bzzt, argument line too long...
> Try again ;>

Bzzzt, try another shell:

zsh:
[malekith at r64 SPECS-all]$ ls *
zsh: argument list too long: ls
[malekith at r64 SPECS-all]$ foreach f in `ls` ; do echo $f > /dev/null ; done

bash:
[malekith at roke SPECS-all]$ ls *
bash: /bin/ls: Argument list too long
[malekith at roke SPECS-all]$ foreach f in `ls` ; do echo $f > /dev/null ; done
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `do'

-- 
   Michal Moskal,
   http://nemerle.org/~malekith/