12 Sep
2019
12 Sep
'19
12:12 p.m.
Okay, while on the subject of SCCS and UNIX:
Is there a UNIX (post SCCS) like System III or System V that still has all of the original
SCCS entries intact?
Would only production ready code be entered as an SCCS delta?
Or, would SCCS be used as a checkpoint tool to store unofficial versions (even broken
versions) of the UNIX codebase as development progressed on the system as a whole?
I would love to see all of the prs for the kernel and commands.
Truly,
Bill Corcoran
On Sep 12, 2019, at 12:33 AM, Larry McVoy
<lm(a)mcvoy.com> wrote:
Yeah, this was one of things that BitKeeper addressed. It was easier
to use and every commit was a tag.
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 09:28:25PM -0700, Jon
Forrest wrote:
I used both RCS and SCCS in the early days (e.g. 1985 - 1991). RCS was
what we used at Britton-Lee in the group that Eric Allman was part of.
SCCS is what we used at Sybase as it was gaining popularity. This was
so long ago that I don't remember all the details but I found that
RCS was much easier to use, especially in an environment that didn't
do much merging. Instead we used labels (or tags, I forget what they
were called) to mark which files were part of which release. Doing
this was much harder in SCCS, which contributed to the mess that
was Sybase software engineering.
Of course, all this could be explained by Eric's deep knowledge
of RCS, and the lack of somebody with Eric's knowledge at Sybase.
But, to me, an early adopter of source code control who wasn't
overly interested in speed, RCS was much easier to use.
Jon
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm