On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 11:18:51AM +0200, Bert Huijben wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@apache.org] > > Sent: maandag 24 oktober 2016 11:08 > > To: dev@subversion.apache.org > > Subject: Re: svn commit: r1764447 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion: > > libsvn_client/conflicts.c tests/libsvn_client/conflicts-test.c > > > > On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 03:31:22PM -0400, James McCoy wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:34:19PM -0000, s...@apache.org wrote: > > > > Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/conflicts.c > > > > URL: > > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/confl > ic > > ts.c?rev=1764447&r1=1764446&r2=1764447&view=diff > > > > > > ================================================================ > > ============== > > > > --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/conflicts.c (original) > > > > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/conflicts.c Wed Oct 12 > > 12:34:18 2016 > > > > @@ -5666,6 +5726,18 @@ diff_file_added(const char *relpath, > > > > FALSE, FALSE, scratch_pool)); > > > > SVN_ERR(svn_io_check_path(local_abspath, &on_disk_kind, > > scratch_pool)); > > > > > > > > + if (db_kind == svn_node_file && db_kind == svn_node_file) > > > > > > Coverity noticed both sides of the && are the same. Should one side be > > > "on_disk_kind == svn_node_file" instead? > > > > > > > Yes indeed, it should. Thanks! I'll fix this when I find time > > if it's not already been fixed by then. > > Be careful when committing this as an 'obvious fix'. I've seen a very > similar problem in the conflict code in the past that has very explicit > tests in our testsuite that verify the current behavior. It is very well > possible that this is just the same code moved to a different location. > > If this is that specific case the problem should be fixed, but it won't be > an obvious fix... more a case of careful review of all the cases that > trigger this code and then updating expected results. > > Bert
Yeah, that's why I didn't commit it myself on the spot. It needs at least one run through the test suite.
