=================
Ok, so you're a CVS user. That's ok, it's a treatable condition, and the
=================
Ok, so you're a CVS user. That's ok, it's a treatable condition, and the
-manager, and you'll thus be happy with almost anything else. Git,
-however, may be a bit _too_ different (read: "good") for your taste, and
+manager, and you'll thus be happy with almost anything else. git,
+however, may be a bit 'too' different (read: "good") for your taste, and
-basically a tool for tracking _file_ history, while git is a tool for
-tracking _project_ history. This sometimes causes problems if you are
+basically a tool for tracking 'file' history, while git is a tool for
+tracking 'project' history. This sometimes causes problems if you are
track that, since git never tracks things on the level of an individual
file, only on the whole project level.
The good news is that most people don't do that, and in fact most sane
people think it's a bug in CVS that makes it tag (and check in changes)
one file at a time. So most projects you'll ever see will use CVS
track that, since git never tracks things on the level of an individual
file, only on the whole project level.
The good news is that most people don't do that, and in fact most sane
people think it's a bug in CVS that makes it tag (and check in changes)
one file at a time. So most projects you'll ever see will use CVS
-First off: this is not a git tutorial. See Documentation/tutorial.txt
-for how git actually works. This is more of a random collection of
-gotcha's and notes on converting from CVS to git.
+First off: this is not a git tutorial. See
+link:tutorial.html[Documentation/tutorial.txt] for how git
+actually works. This is more of a random collection of gotcha's
+and notes on converting from CVS to git.
Second: CVS has the notion of a "repository" as opposed to the thing
that you're actually working in (your working directory, or your
Second: CVS has the notion of a "repository" as opposed to the thing
that you're actually working in (your working directory, or your
-"checked out tree"). Git does not have that notion at all, and all git
-working directories _are_ the repositories. However, you can easily
+"checked out tree"). git does not have that notion at all, and all git
+working directories 'are' the repositories. However, you can easily
emulate the CVS model by having one special "global repository", which
people can synchronize with. See details later, but in the meantime
just keep in mind that with git, every checked out working tree will
emulate the CVS model by having one special "global repository", which
people can synchronize with. See details later, but in the meantime
just keep in mind that with git, every checked out working tree will
will need the help of a program called "cvsps":
http://www.cobite.com/cvsps/
which is not actually related to git at all, but which makes CVS usage
look almost sane (ie you almost certainly want to have it even if you
will need the help of a program called "cvsps":
http://www.cobite.com/cvsps/
which is not actually related to git at all, but which makes CVS usage
look almost sane (ie you almost certainly want to have it even if you
of cvsps (available at the address above), and in fact will currently
refuse to work with anything else.
of cvsps (available at the address above), and in fact will currently
refuse to work with anything else.
there that can be used to get equivalent information (see the git
mailing list archives for details).
there that can be used to get equivalent information (see the git
mailing list archives for details).
or even superior depending on your use. One is called "git-whatchanged"
(for obvious reasons) and the other one is called "pickaxe" ("a tool for
the software archeologist").
or even superior depending on your use. One is called "git-whatchanged"
(for obvious reasons) and the other one is called "pickaxe" ("a tool for
the software archeologist").
command that reads the list of commits and compares each commit
with its parents. The git-whatchanged command internally runs
the equivalent of the above command, and can be used like this:
command that reads the list of commits and compares each commit
with its parents. The git-whatchanged command internally runs
the equivalent of the above command, and can be used like this:
Also, in the original context, the same statement might have
appeared at first in a different file and later the file was
renamed to "a-file.c". CVS annotate would not help you to go
Also, in the original context, the same statement might have
appeared at first in a different file and later the file was
renamed to "a-file.c". CVS annotate would not help you to go
a situation. For that, you can give the -C flag to
git-diff-tree, like this:
a situation. For that, you can give the -C flag to
git-diff-tree, like this:
"o-file.c", it would find the commit that changed the statement
when it was in "o-file.c".
"o-file.c", it would find the commit that changed the statement
when it was in "o-file.c".
enough to find copies, and it will miss the fact that a-file.c
was created by copying o-file.c unless o-file.c was somehow
enough to find copies, and it will miss the fact that a-file.c
was created by copying o-file.c unless o-file.c was somehow
You can use the --pickaxe-all flag in addition to the -S flag.
This causes the differences from all the files contained in
You can use the --pickaxe-all flag in addition to the -S flag.
This causes the differences from all the files contained in