Thanks for catching this. I'll cook up a test and fix it.
- Julian
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 01:22 -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
Tonight I ran into a codepath which triggers and assertion.
$ svn up
subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c:383: (apr_err=235000)
svn: In file
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Philip Martin
philip.mar...@wandisco.com wrote:
You are more likely to get some response if you send a patch against
trunk with a log message, see
http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/general.html#patches
Thanks for the link. I'm not ready yet with
Hi devs,
From what I understand about the performance problems of WC-1 vs.
WC-NG, and what I'm reading on this list, I expect(ed) a huge
performance boost from WC-NG for certain client operations (especially
on Windows, where the locking of WC-1 is quite problematic). Also, I
knew I had to wait
On 02.09.2010 10:50, Branko Čibej wrote:
On 02.09.2010 10:27, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Daniel Näslund wrote on Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 07:13:00 +0200:
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 06:37:08PM +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
This may be off topic, but I'm wondering whether Git has defined such
operations on
-Original Message-
From: C. Michael Pilato [mailto:cmpil...@collab.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 7:47 PM
To: Philip Martin
Cc: dmitry boyarintsev; dev@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: Pascal bindings
On 09/02/2010 01:38 PM, Philip Martin wrote:
dmitry boyarintsev
s...@apache.org wrote on Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 15:49:52 -:
Author: stsp
Date: Sat Aug 28 15:49:52 2010
New Revision: 990385
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=990385view=rev
Log:
* subversion/libsvn_client/patch.c
(try_stream_write): Remove a question I put into a comment, not
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 01:47:06PM +0300, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
s...@apache.org wrote on Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 15:49:52 -:
Author: stsp
Date: Sat Aug 28 15:49:52 2010
New Revision: 990385
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=990385view=rev
Log:
* subversion/libsvn_client/patch.c
pbu...@apache.org writes:
Author: pburba
Date: Thu Sep 2 18:10:01 2010
New Revision: 992042
@@ -5718,6 +5849,37 @@ get_mergeinfo_paths(apr_array_header_t *
merge_cmd_baton-ctx-cancel_baton,
scratch_pool));
+
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 12:18:37PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote:
On 02.09.2010 10:50, Branko Čibej wrote:
Hmm, this is interesting. :) Git faithfully (blindly?) interprets Unix
permission bits, whiles SVN faithfully (blindly?) interprets the
contents of special files ... I wonder if svn patch
This patch is for the following file.
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/contrib/client-side/svn_apply_autoprops.py
Log message:
Do not apply autoprops on symbolic links in svn_apply_autoprops.py.
Index: svn_apply_autoprops.py
I (Julian Foad) wrote:
Thanks for catching this. I'll cook up a test and fix it.
Fixed in r992276, with a new test.
- Julian
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 01:22 -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
Tonight I ran into a codepath which triggers and assertion.
$ svn up
Sorry, that line should have been
matching_filenames = [f for f in matching_filenames if not
os.path.islink(dirname+'/'+f)]
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Wei-Yin Chen wyc...@video.ee.ntu.edu.twwrote:
This patch is for the following file.
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 08:58:09PM +0800, Wei-Yin Chen wrote:
Sorry, that line should have been
matching_filenames = [f for f in matching_filenames if not
os.path.islink(dirname+'/'+f)]
Hi,
thanks for your patch!
I think we should use os.sep instead of '/', because os.sep is more portable.
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Julian Foad julian.f...@wandisco.com wrote:
pbu...@apache.org wrote:
Fix issue #2915 'Handle mergeinfo for subtrees missing due to removal by
non-svn command'.
With this change, if you attempt a merge-tracking aware merge to a WC
which is missing subtrees due
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 04:46, Bert Huijben b...@qqmail.nl wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
Sent: vrijdag 3 september 2010 1:14
To: Julian Foad
Cc: Erik Huelsmann; dev@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] WC-NG: merge NODE_DATA,
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 06:09, Johan Corveleyn jcor...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi devs,
From what I understand about the performance problems of WC-1 vs.
WC-NG, and what I'm reading on this list, I expect(ed) a huge
performance boost from WC-NG for certain client operations (especially
on Windows,
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 22:51, Hyrum K. Wright
hyrum_wri...@mail.utexas.edu wrote:
...
My one concern (and perhaps this comes from not following the
discussion closely enough) is how this impacts 1.7. This feels eerily
like an eleventh-hour redesign, and our track record with these in the
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 22:51, Hyrum K. Wright
hyrum_wri...@mail.utexas.edu wrote:
...
My one concern (and perhaps this comes from not following the
discussion closely enough) is how this impacts 1.7. This feels eerily
like
-Original Message-
From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
Sent: vrijdag 3 september 2010 17:23
To: Bert Huijben
Cc: Julian Foad; Erik Huelsmann; dev@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] WC-NG: merge NODE_DATA, WORKING_NODE and
BASE_NODE into a single table (NODES)
From IRC logs...
09:53 @danielsh wayita: tell artagnon
http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/svn-dev?date=2010-08-20#l83 --- has
that been resolved?
(can't find any record in mail/irc archives)
So, do you remember what that race condition is? And whether it's
been
Ping. Was the 'race condition' I mentioned in my other mail related to
'svnrdump load' setting revprop (which may fail if a hook hadn't been
set up)?
Bert Huijben wrote on Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:55:44 -0700:
-Original Message-
From: artag...@apache.org
Hyrum K. Wright hyrum_wri...@mail.utexas.edu writes:
Sure, but is this bring us back to parity with 1.6 work, or is it
new stuff we can do with wc-ng work? If the former, it's certainly
a release blocker. If the latter, I'm not so sure
We currently have a regression from 1.6, wc-ng
As I recall, Stefan recently declared the performance branch done.
It's encouraging to see a few intrepid users and devs looking at the
branch and providing feedback.
Through IRC and other conversations, I've gotten the feeling that some
of the changes made on the branch might be a bit too
Hi Daniel,
Daniel Shahaf writes:
From IRC logs...
09:53 @danielsh wayita: tell artagnon
http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/svn-dev?date=2010-08-20#l83 ---
has that been resolved?
(can't find any record in mail/irc archives)
So, do you remember what that race
Hi Daniel,
Daniel Shahaf writes:
Ping. Was the 'race condition' I mentioned in my other mail related to
'svnrdump load' setting revprop (which may fail if a hook hadn't been
set up)?
Yep. I have to try setting some dummy revprop and barf out quickly
before getting caught up in between real
rhuij...@apache.org wrote on Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 17:34:52 -:
+ for (i = 0; i db-nbr_statements; i++)
+if (db-prepared_stmts[i] db-prepared_stmts[i]-needs_reset)
+ err2 = svn_error_compose_create(
+ err2,
+
On Sep 3, 2010, at 7:10 AM, Daniel Näslund wrote:
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 12:18:37PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote:
On 02.09.2010 10:50, Branko Čibej wrote:
Hmm, this is interesting. :) Git faithfully (blindly?) interprets
Unix
permission bits, whiles SVN faithfully (blindly?) interprets the
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 11:46, Bert Huijben b...@qqmail.nl wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
Sent: vrijdag 3 september 2010 17:23
To: Bert Huijben
Cc: Julian Foad; Erik Huelsmann; dev@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] WC-NG: merge
28 matches
Mail list logo
