On Monday 07 November 2005 5:07 pm, Derek Atkins wrote: > Who asked for that? I've asked for emailed-in patches to be small.. > But who ever said that SVN commits should be small? SVN commits > should be functionally-complete objects.
OK, understood. (The request was probably from the cvs time - something about keeping commits logically coherent.) Looks like I took that one stage too far. Sorry. > svn checkout a new copy of the trunk branch? > svn revert? OK - to make sure I get this right, it looks like svn revert needs a target file: http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/re25.html I can't see how to revert to a specific revision - I know it should be possible. I don't see an option on svn help revert to specify a revision tag. Could someone help me with this? (off-list if you like). > it prevents autogenerated files from getting into your source tree. > it lets you start a new "build from scratch" by running: > > rm -rf build-tree; mkdir build-tree; cd build-tree; lndir ../src-tree ; > ./autogen.sh ; ./configure ; make ; make install OK, I see that. Thank you. > I've certainly mentioned this on the list NUMEROUS times. I don't think you've mentioned it whilst I've been reading the lists but no matter. (May be an idea to put this in README.svn though.) :-) > > I fouled up, OK? Now please stop shooting me and let's see how to fix it. > > I don't think anyone is trying to shoot you. I, at least, was trying to > understand why you did what you did to understand what was going through > your mind. You might know something I don't... Thanks for the (misplaced) confidence but in this case, I simply got it wrong. It happens sometimes. > Or you might have just > been confused in which case knowing what you were thinking could help in > correcting your misunderstandings. I think we ALL are just trying to help > you fix it. OK. (the angst is as much my own guilt at making such a foul up as anything else, I suppose.) > For example, you could just revert your tree to the revision before > your changes > or even revert the repository to the previous revision. (This is yet > another reason to have fuctionally-complete commits -- makes it easier to > migrate or revert changesets). From the svn book, it looks like it's actually update I need to call: $ svn update --revision PREV foo.c # rewinds the last change on foo.c. # (foo.c's working revision is decreased.) Is it: svn update --revision r11887 ? More confusion. svn revert appears to only work on files not revisions: $ svn help revert revert: Restore pristine working copy file (undo most local edits). usage: revert PATH... Note: this subcommand does not require network access, and resolves any conflicted states. However, it does not restore removed directories. Valid options: --targets arg : pass contents of file ARG as additional args -R [--recursive] : descend recursively -q [--quiet] : print as little as possible --config-dir arg : read user configuration files from directory ARG That's my problem - the local edits were trashed. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpmLudckDlI7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
