Re: [patch] Input cleanups for 2.5.29 [2/2]

[Linus T. <tor...@tr...>]

On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> 
> Now the question remaining is how to fix that? You can just skip the
> patch. I've tried a 'bk undo', but that complains about unmerged leaves
> in that case (though really nothing depends on those changes). Or should
> I just make another cset on top of all the previous?

Ugh. there's a few things you can do

 - I often actually do a "bk undo -axxx" and then just re-do the parts I 
   want to re-do.

   NOTE! This only works if you haven't already had people pull from your 
   repository (or you'll need to ask them to do the "bk undo" as well).

 - You can reverse the cset, which means that it's still there, but there 
   is also a cset that says "undo that other cset". I prefer to not pull 
   those kinds of undo's, but they do happen, and I occasionally do them
   myself. I try to avoid it, but it's very useful for debugging ("does 
   that problem go away if I undo just that one cset?"), and sometimes 
   it _is_ the sanest way to go.

   So do "bk cset -xA.BBB"

 - in this case, maybe just adding a new cset is the proper thing. 
   Especially as reversing the cset doesn't actually get you where you
   want anyway, since you'd still have to do the "unsigned short" -> "u16"  
   translation as yet another cset.

I only get upset if the tree looks _really_ cluttered, in which case I may 
ask you to re-do it (that's happened once with the reiserfs tree).

			Linus