Re: spamd, greylisting and bad MTA's

[Rickard Borgmäster <doktorn_(_at_)_sub_(_dot_)_nu>]

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 12:24:07 -0300
Fabio Olive Leite <fabio_(_dot_)_olive_(_at_)_gmail_(_dot_)_com> hit the keyboard and punched:

> On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:20:30PM +0200, Rickard Borgmdster wrote:
> > 
> > What will happen if I cvs update my src tree afterwards? Will my src
> > stay 3.6-stable while sources in libexec/spamd/ stay "current"?
> 
> You can go to spamd's directory and issue:
> cvs update -r 1.74 spamd.c
> 
> This will stick only your spamd.c to this version, while the rest
> stays stuck wherever they are, like OPENBSD_3_6.
> 
> It will not contaminate other files, and you are not going to venture
> into -current, don't worry about that.

Hello Fabian,

Thank you. Now I feel a bit more confident in mixing and matching sources
in the cvs :-)

One thing I don't understand though...

If I do "cvs update -r 1.74 spamd.c" only spamd.c is updateed (which
probably is ok) but I thought that other files in the directory might have
been updated too (such as grey.c or some). So if I do "cvs update -r 1.74"
the whole directory would be updated. Yes, if the rest of the files ID
matched 1.74, which they do not. Do I have to update each file manually?
And, how do I know which version of (example) grey.h ism concurrent with
spamd.c 1.74?


-- 

Rickard

                                               .--.        .--.
.----------------------------------------.     |  |        |  | .-.
|           Rickard Borgmdster           |     |  |        |  |/  /
|             doktorn_(_at_)_sub_(_dot_)_nu             |   .-^  |  .--.  |     <
|         http://doktorn.sub.nu/         |  (  o  | ( () ) |  |\  \
`----------------------------------------'  `-----'  `--'  `--' `--'