One more comment - maybe superfluous - with svn you 'checkout' a file the moment you edit it.

(or to put it more accurately, when you get the files from the trunk you've checked them out.
To see the files you've edited/added/deleted, use svn stat, or (to ignore any miscellaneous/temporary files: svn stat -q).


You can't check it back in unless you are a derby-committer, so you'll have to make a patch & canvass for a committer to evaluate & check in your changes.

Myrna

Bernd Ruehlicke (JIRA) wrote:

[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-147?page=comments#action_61512 ]
Bernd Ruehlicke commented on DERBY-147:
---------------------------------------


"Shreyas has provided some pointers" .. - ehhh - where do I find them ?  Really 
- it's just to get started. So a a little example of how to checkout a file and check it 
back would do it.

Thanx
Bernd



ERROR 42X79 not consistant ? - same column name specified twice
---------------------------------------------------------------

Key: DERBY-147
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-147
Project: Derby
Type: Bug
Reporter: Bernd Ruehlicke





This happens from JDBC or ij. Here the output form ij>
ij version 10.0 CONNECTION0* - jdbc:derby:phsDB * = current connection ij> select a1.XXX_foreign, a1.native, a1.kind, a1.XXX_foreign FROM slg_name_lookup a1 ORDER BY a1.XXX_foreign;
ERROR 42X79: Column name 'XXX_FOREIGN' appears more than once in the result of the query expression. But when removing the ORDER BY and keeping the 2 same column names it works
ij> select a1.XXX_foreign, a1.native, a1.kind, a1.XXX_foreign FROM slg_name_lookup a1;
XXX_FOREIGN |NATIVE |KIND |XXX_FOREIGN ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 rows selected ij> So - it seams to be OK to specify the same column twice - as long as you do not add the ORDER BY clause. I woul dof course like that the system allows this - but at leats it should be consistant and either allow both or none of the two queries above.









Reply via email to