> But ... but ... you said it *did* output an error: > > "... result in the expected error 'Unable to find repository location' ..." > > Did you read my comments and apply them to wrong section of your mail?
i apologize, i read your email to fast. Your are right - this is actually the expected error for numbered revision ranges - as I wrote myself at the top. Sorry for the noise... About the other cases "-r 2:HEAD" or "-r HEAD:2". I would expect a patch to do the following: The two revision variables START_REVNUM and END_REVNUM in "svn_client_log5" (libsvn_client/log.c) must be verified to be related to path@PEG. This can be done using the function "svn_client__repos_locations". Since that call is only necessary if START/END_REVNUM is greater that the PEG_REV i would perform this check only if that is the case. Would that be a suitable fix? Do you have any doubts against this approach? If not i could try to post a patch in the next hours. Dirk
