Very Computer

I'm considering using RCS or SCCS for system file control (e.g.,
/etc/vfstab, /etc/services, etc.).  I've noticed that RCS seems to
have one shortcoming with this type of use in that if I do not
specify "-u" to the ci utility, RCS moves the file of interest to
a ",v" version into either the current working directory or ./RCS.
Omitting this switch on something like /etc/system could be
disastrous.

What good solutions exist for managing system files using standard
tools such as RCS or SCCS?

Thank you.

--
Mark S. Petrovic                                      v 816
854-3152      
Technical Operations and Development                  p 800 724-3508
Sprint Internet Passport                                PIN 385-6972, or
Kansas City, MO                                        

Quote:>I'm considering using RCS or SCCS for system file control (e.g.,
>/etc/vfstab, /etc/services, etc.).  I've noticed that RCS seems to
>have one shortcoming with this type of use in that if I do not
>specify "-u" to the ci utility, RCS moves the file of interest to
>a ",v" version into either the current working directory or ./RCS.

"ci fname" is equivalent to "sccs delta fname", and does:

    check in the current edits, do not leave read-only file.

Sometimes this is what you want.

"ci -u fname" is equivalent to "sccs delget fname" and does:

    check in the current edits, leave a read-only copy.

Sometimes this is what you want.

Quote:>Omitting this switch on something like /etc/system could be
>disastrous.

--

Lattice Semiconductor Corp.                    (voice)1.503.681.0118
Hillsboro, OR, USA                               (fax)1.503.693.0540

Quote:>I'm considering using RCS or SCCS for system file control (e.g.,
>/etc/vfstab, /etc/services, etc.).  I've noticed that RCS seems to
>have one shortcoming with this type of use in that if I do not
>specify "-u" to the ci utility, RCS moves the file of interest to
>a ",v" version into either the current working directory or ./RCS.
>Omitting this switch on something like /etc/system could be
>disastrous.

If you are afraid you'll forget to check it out, write a wrapper to
check it in, then check it out without a lock...

--
Clay Irving                                        See the happy moron,

http://www.panix.com/~clay                         I wish I were a moron,
                                                   My God! Perhaps I am!

Quote:> What good solutions exist for managing system files using standard
> tools such as RCS or SCCS?

--

 I was an atheist,            http://home1.swipnet . se/%7Ew-12153/
 until I found out I was God.

Quote:>I'm considering using RCS or SCCS for system file control (e.g.,
>/etc/vfstab, /etc/services, etc.).  I've noticed that RCS seems to
>have one shortcoming with this type of use in that if I do not
>specify "-u" to the ci utility, RCS moves the file of interest to
>a ",v" version into either the current working directory or ./RCS.
>Omitting this switch on something like /etc/system could be
>disastrous.

Using Make to manage RCS files sounds like a really good idea. Is there
someone that have a sample Makefile to do this? My knowledge of Make is
limited, so I would have spent several hours, if not days, figuring it
all out. A sample Makefile would be very welcomed.

: >I'm considering using RCS or SCCS for system file control (e.g.,
: >/etc/vfstab, /etc/services, etc.).  I've noticed that RCS seems to
: >have one shortcoming with this type of use in that if I do not
: >specify "-u" to the ci utility, RCS moves the file of interest to
: >a ",v" version into either the current working directory or ./RCS.
: >Omitting this switch on something like /etc/system could be
: >disastrous.

: In a past life, I managed lots of system files with RCS, and got into
: the habit of using "ci -l" at all times.  This leaves the file locked,
: and thus in place.  If you have different users su'ing to root and all
: editing the same file, then this scheme might give you user conflict errors
: when you call "ci -l".
: --
: Ed Ravin        |If I were not a little mad and generally silly

:                 |I should show you in a moment how to grapple with the question
:                 |And you'd really be astonished at the force of my suggestion.

--
------------------------------------------------------------
Rune Mossige, Systems Support           Tel : +47 515 98 922
Western Geophysical, Stavanger, Norway  Fax : +47 515 98 999

                                      Mobile: +47 908 71 024

Quote:>I'm considering using RCS or SCCS for system file control (e.g.,
>/etc/vfstab, /etc/services, etc.).  I've noticed that RCS seems to
>have one shortcoming with this type of use in that if I do not
>specify "-u" to the ci utility, RCS moves the file of interest to
>a ",v" version into either the current working directory or ./RCS.
>Omitting this switch on something like /etc/system could be
>disastrous.