On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 05:49:08PM -0400, Vaclav Petras wrote: > On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Markus Metz > <[1][email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 8:16 PM, Huidae Cho <[2][email protected]> > wrote: > > Hmm... I "remove"d g.list/g.remove and "rename"d > g.mlist/g.mremove. Maybe, > > there is a better way? > Did you "remove" or "svn remove"? Same for "rename". I guess you did > "svn [remove|rename]", and some other people did not "make > distclean" > before "svn up". FWIW, I had no problems with your changes, doing > "make distclean" before "svn up". > Whoever compiles GRASS from source and wants the latest and greatest > (svn up), must clean the source code first with "make distclean" > before recompiling. This applies to all 4 branches. This is not > GRASS > specific but the way how svn works. > > make distclean or just make clean, this might be it. The message from > SVN was not much helpful, although it changed from the previous > version. > But usually you don't have to do make *clean, so how to know these > things ahead (except for looking at Trac)? I don't know. Or is there > some option in SVN (from the options you are given) to use "theirs all" > as it was in previous SVN version (I don't know which)?
I guess that when you "svn up", it doesn't clean the OBJ directory in the old g.list/g.remove directories and old object files conflict with the new source files? Huidae > > Markus M > > > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Vaclav Petras > <[3][email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Markus Neteler > <[4][email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Vaclav Petras > <[5][email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> ... > >>> > Confirmed, I had to do the same in all copies too some time ago. > SVN is > >>> > not > >>> > really good at renaming and deleting things, it is always > confused and > >>> > I > >>> > really don't understand why I need to do revert. > >>> > >>> As this almost never happened, it may have been this specific > commit > >>> being different from others. > >>> Whatever, the solution we have. > >>> > >> Oh, now I hope it was not because I recommended some Git-like > procedure to > >> Huidae which is not really what SVN wanted. Anyway, it was easy to > solve > >> although it required manual intervention to automatic builds (at > least the > >> one for tests). > >> > >> > >>> > >>> Markus > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> grass-dev mailing list > >> [6][email protected] > >> [7]http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > grass-dev mailing list > > [8][email protected] > > [9]http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev > > References > > 1. mailto:[email protected] > 2. mailto:[email protected] > 3. mailto:[email protected] > 4. mailto:[email protected] > 5. mailto:[email protected] > 6. mailto:[email protected] > 7. http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev > 8. mailto:[email protected] > 9. http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
