stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) (11/08/90)
The current limit of 14 character file names in rcs makes it
nearly impossible to support meaningful filenames with "rcs".
(rcs is the only Source Code Control System provided by NeXT.)
Does anyone know if NeXT has fixed this serious oversight with
their soon to be released version 2.0?
We need 256 character file name support now, and can not wait for
2.0 to ship (or for it to be installed). So we will start work on
porting the newer version tomorrow unless someone let's us know
about a port done somewhere else.
Has anyone else run into this problem?
If yes, how did you solve it (or work around it)?
The man page for the version of rcs on our 1.0 systems has the
following identification:
Author: Walter F. Tichy, Purdue University, West Lafayette,
IN, 47907.
Revision Number: 3.1 ; Release Date: 83/04/04 .
Copyright (C) 1982 by Walter F. Tichy.
The man page from the source code available from uunet.uu.net
has the following identification:
Author: Walter F. Tichy, Purdue University, West Lafayette,
IN, 47907.
Revision Number: 1.3 ; Release Date: 89/05/02 .
Copyright (C) 1982, 1988, 1989 by Walter F. Tichy.
The revision numbering scheme must have changed since 1983.
It is clear that NeXT is very likely using a version of rcs
that is 6 or more years behind what is, most likely, the latest
version.
From looking in the source code for the '89 version it is clear that
support for 256 character file names is now an option.
Does anyone know which tool NeXT is using for source code control?
Thanks in advance for your help with this.
Stan
--
Stan Osborne, Computer Science Department, San Francisco State University
Internet: stan@cs.sfsu.edu Usenet: cshub!stan Voice: (415) 338-2168rock@lighthouse.com (11/09/90)
In article <1007@toaster.SFSU.EDU> stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) writes: >Does anyone know if NeXT has fixed this serious oversight with >their soon to be released version 2.0? Yes, 2.0 NeXTstep includes RCS version 4. >Has anyone else run into this problem? If yes, how did you solve it >(or work around it)? We installed a new version of RCS... >Does anyone know which tool NeXT is using for source code control? NeXT uses some homegrown system (not RCS or SCCS). BTW, an even newer version of RCS (one that handles binary files) will be available soon. Roger Rosner Lighthouse Design, Ltd. rock@lighthouse.com
dennisg@kgw2.bwi.WEC.COM (Dennis Glatting) (11/09/90)
In article <1007@toaster.SFSU.EDU>, stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) writes: |> The current limit of 14 character file names in rcs makes it |> nearly impossible to support meaningful filenames with "rcs". |> (rcs is the only Source Code Control System provided by NeXT.) |> |> Does anyone know if NeXT has fixed this serious oversight with |> their soon to be released version 2.0? |> |> We need 256 character file name support now, and can not wait for |> 2.0 to ship (or for it to be installed). So we will start work on |> porting the newer version tomorrow unless someone let's us know |> about a port done somewhere else. |> |> Has anyone else run into this problem? |> If yes, how did you solve it (or work around it)? say dude. i downloaded the latest RCS from uunet ages ago (RCS 4.?). i ported it to the NeXT and the Sun. no problem. i didn't return the diffs because i didn't make the hack backwards compatible. -- ..!uunet!kgw2!dennisg | Dennis P. Glatting dennisg@kgw2.bwi.WEC.COM | X2NeXT developer
edwardj@microsoft.UUCP (Edward JUNG) (11/10/90)
In article <1007@toaster.SFSU.EDU> stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) writes: [stuff about rcs filename length limit] > >Has anyone else run into this problem? >If yes, how did you solve it (or work around it)? I ported the new RCS last year and informed NeXT of the problem. The port was pretty straight-forward (define strict bsd, etc.). >Does anyone know which tool NeXT is using for source code control? They are using in-house tools. At OOPSLA NeXT noted their intention to produce better tools of this sort in future OS releases (the next release was mentioned). -- Edward Jung Microsoft Corp. My opinions do not reflect any policy of my employer.