SCCS for MS-DOS?

Thread View: alt.msdos.programmer

5 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

5 total messages Started by Dave Levenson Fri, 19 May 1989 23:55

#1232

Author: Dave Levenson
Date: Fri, 19 May 1989 23:55

18 lines
918 bytes

I'm looking for an SCCS-clone for MS-DOS.  I have heard about one
from Poly-something, and I have heard of MKS RCS.  I haven't heard
anything _about_ either. 

I use Microsoft C and MASM.  I currently use Microsoft MAKE.  I
would be willing to use another make, but I would like to stay with
the MS complier and assembler.

Can anyone offer recommendations or advice regarding the above
mentioned, or any other source code revision-control tools for the
MS-DOS environment?

Thanks.

-- 
Dave Levenson
{uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave	
...the man in the mooney

Re: SCCS for MS-DOS?

#1233

Author: Lars Thomas Hansen
Date: Sat, 20 May 1989 23:17

12 lines
1125 bytes

In article <1374@westmark.UUCP> dave@westmark.UUCP (Dave Levenson) writes:
>I'm looking for an SCCS-clone for MS-DOS.  I have heard about one
>from Poly-something, and I have heard of MKS RCS.  I haven't heard
>anything _about_ either. 

A seemingly thorough review of a number of source control systems for MS-DOS
can be found in two issues of last year's "The C User's Journal", published
by R&D Publications/The C User's Group, Lawrence, KS (Don't have street
address, zip, or phone # here. Sorry.) They generelly have back issues
for sale.

--lars

Re: SCCS for MS-DOS?

#1234

Author: Scott Hutchinson
Date: Mon, 22 May 1989 15:33

17 lines
1170 bytes

In article <1374@westmark.UUCP> dave@westmark.UUCP (Dave Levenson) writes:
>from Poly-something, and I have heard of MKS RCS.  I haven't heard
>anything _about_ either. 

	We've been using Polytron for a short time, they have a good
evaluation program.  We are evaluating Poly PVCS, ploy-make, doc and
lib.  They also handle networking.  From what I've seen of it, it
appears to be set up for large scale revision control, although I heard
they also have a personal version.

					-Scott Hutchinson

-- 
                                     -Scott H. Hutchinson
Standard Disclamers:  These opinions are mine, they do not reflect on my
                      Company at all.
I can be reached at scotth@grebyn.com or scotth@grebyn.uucp

Re: SCCS for MS-DOS?

#1237

Author: John R. Levine
Date: Mon, 22 May 1989 23:54

18 lines
1569 bytes

In article <1374@westmark.UUCP> dave@westmark.UUCP (Dave Levenson) writes:
>I'm looking for an SCCS-clone for MS-DOS. ...
>I use Microsoft C and MASM.  I currently use Microsoft MAKE.  ...

I've had good experience with Polytron's PVCS, which is more or less a
reimplementation of rcs.  It works nicely.  I used it to control a project
with about 75,000 lines of source code and six people working on it at once.

Microsoft "make" is the worst excuse for a make program that I have ever seen.
It makes only one sequential pass through the makefile, which means that you
can't have very interesting dependencies.  I'd use the make that comes with
Turbo C, or else one of the free makes that has been floating around the BBS
world.  You can mix and match source control programs, compilers, and make
programs since they all use the same plain ASCII file formats.
-- 
John R. Levine, Segue Software, POB 349, Cambridge MA 02238, +1 617 492 3869
{ bbn | spdcc | decvax | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, Levine@YALE.something
Massachusetts has 64 licensed drivers who are over 100 years old.  -The Globe

Re: SCCS for MS-DOS?

#1238

Author: Dave Tutelman
Date: Tue, 23 May 1989 11:10

34 lines
2213 bytes

In article <3952@ima.ima.isc.com> johnl@ima.UUCP (John R. Levine) writes:
>In article <1374@westmark.UUCP> dave@westmark.UUCP (Dave Levenson) writes:
>>I'm looking for an SCCS-clone for MS-DOS. ...
>>I use Microsoft C and MASM.  I currently use Microsoft MAKE.  ...
>
>I've had good experience with Polytron's PVCS...
	I, too, have good experience with PVCS.  About a year and a half
	ago, we used PVCS on a project with 4 developers and an integrator.
	It worked well enough.  My major complaint at the time was
	the lack of knowledge of who had checked out a file, but we
	were using the "personal" version on a file server; I believe
	they now have a "networked" version, and that would be a
	natural difference to implement.

>Microsoft "make" is the worst excuse for a make program that I have ever seen.
	Hear, hear!  It's really a toy.  Get yourself a tool.
	The MAKE from Turbo C is good, as are Don Kneller's two MAKEs,
	the shareware NDMAKE and commercial OPUS make.

	HOWEVER... if you use PVCS, it's worth getting PolyMAKE from
	PolyTron.  It's as good as the others (each has its pros and cons),
	and it knows about PVCS archives.  I was able to implement some
	Makefiles for the integrator that allowed version-specific
	manufacture, while the ordinary developers could do very
	efficient latest-version makes.  It would have been
	clumsy-to-impossible to accomplish this with a MAKE that
	didn't know how to read PVCS archives.

+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|    Dave Tutelman						|
|    Physical - AT&T Bell Labs  -  Middletown, NJ		|
|    Logical -  ...att!mtunb!dmt				|
|    Audible -  (201) 957 6583					|
+---------------------------------------------------------------+

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads