On 12/21/10 3:22 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
On 12/21/10 10:55 AM, Blair Zajac wrote:
On 12/21/10 10:40 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Blair Zajac wrote on Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 10:16:56 -0800:
On 12/20/10 11:32 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
On 12/20/2010 02:14 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
Shouldn't svn_repos_fs_commit_txn() always run the post-commit hook if
new_rev is a valid rev?
That does seem reasonable, yes.
Looking through our code, no existing use of svn_fs_commit_txn() and
svn_repos_fs_commit_txn() use SVN_IS_VALID_REVNUM(new_rev), the code
checks for a non-NULL svn_error_t * and checks if the parent error is a
SVN_ERR_REPOS_POST_COMMIT_HOOK_FAILED. It also doesn't scan the chain
for that error.
svn_error_has_cause() could be used for that.
Daniel,
I need a version of svn_error_has_cause() that returns the actual error. How
about replacing svn_error_has_cause() with svn_error_find_cause() that returns a
NULL or the error? It could still be used for the Boolean test case in this way.
I checked if you were on IRC, but I've got a deadline on a project I'm working
on and needed this, so I went ahead and made the change.
r1051702
Blair
