"Bert Huijben" <b...@qqmail.nl> writes: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: phi...@apache.org [mailto:phi...@apache.org] >> Sent: donderdag 15 juli 2010 17:42 >> To: comm...@subversion.apache.org >> Subject: svn commit: r964471 - >> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/update.c >> >> Author: philip >> Date: Thu Jul 15 15:41:32 2010 >> New Revision: 964471 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=964471&view=rev >> Log: >> * subversion/libsvn_client/update.c (internal_update): Don't unlock >> here. > > Why? > > It's the responsibility of the caller to obtain and release the > locks, just like in the access batons or we break al the access > baton functions. (I know that the update_editor releases locks in > some cases where it didn't in 1.6.. This might be the cause of the > dav failures)
The caller, svn_client__update_internal, does lock and unlock. Having internal_update unlock and then having the caller unlock as well is wrong. -- Philip
