On 08.07.2013 04:14, ВарфоломеевИгорь wrote:
ВарфоломеевИгорь i3v at mail.ru writes:
I'm still not sure what should I do next...
Should I re-address this to dev at subversion.apache.org ?
No one responded, and I've re-posted the same report to dev, here:
On 08.07.2013 01:06, Miro Kropáček wrote:
Hello,
I'm not subscribed to the list. I'd like to ask about one issue I'm
having. Let's say I've got a tree like this:
server/svn/trunk/software
server/svn/trunk/software/user
server/svn/trunk/software/wicked_filenames
server/svn/trunk/documentation
Hi Tobias,
You're right, a simple 'svn update' in 'trunk' or 'software' should not
pull in any directories of files outside of 'user'. That should only happen
if you run e.g. 'svn update --set-depth infinity'. What Subversion version
are you using and on what platform?
It's Windows, the one
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Tobias Bading tbad...@web.de wrote:
You said you did an update yesterday, have you tried it with the latest
1.7 Tortoise release and a fresh working copy?
What I meant is that I'm not sure in which version I had tried this, I
can't remember order of these two
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Miro Kropáček miro.kropa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Tobias Bading tbad...@web.de wrote:
You said you did an update yesterday, have you tried it with the latest
1.7 Tortoise release and a fresh working copy?
What I meant is that I'm
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Johan Corveleyn jcor...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Miro Kropáček miro.kropa...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Tobias Bading tbad...@web.de wrote:
You said you did an update yesterday, have you tried it with the latest
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Johan Corveleyn jcor...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, check the version of the server. I think if you use a very old
server, that server might not fully understand the depth nuances. So
it's possible that this is just a back compat thing: the server will
send
Branko Čibej wrote on Fri, 05 Jul 2013 22:12:34 GMT:
Can you confirm that all the branches created by copying (svn copy) from the
source, as you've described in this diagram?
Damn you are right. Some unexperimented people thought years ago that they were
more clever than the system,
created
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 11:30:28AM +0200, Eric Estievenart wrote:
I'm currently investigating the details and implications of these horrors,
but I feel we are a bit doomed.
You could rewrite history, creating copyfrom pointers in old revisions.
Create a new repository, create the common
Branko Čibej brane at wandisco.com writes:
I did explain it was a design bug in Subversion on Windows that has been
around more or less forever. What other kind of response did you expect?
Yep, I got that.
And I understand this one, most probably, won't be fixed tomorrow...
Though, I'm
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 13:40, Stefan Sperling wrote:
You could rewrite history, creating copyfrom pointers in old revisions.
Create a new repository, create the common ancestor branch in the first
commit, create the other branches as copies, and then replay your existing
history on top of
Dear Sir/Madam,
Greetings !!!
I want to configure Apache subversion as server.
I have installed subversion and Apache and made settings (httpd.conf) to
host my repositories. I run the test configuation in Apache utility to check
the connection and it shows no error. However, when
Hi!
Short story: it seems for me, subversion-1.8.0 (and, perhaps, 1.7.0) has broken
support
for plaintext password storage.
Long story: I upgraded to 1.8.0, built it under FreeBSD 8.4-STABLE using fresh
ports collection.
I have local repository and run svnserve to access it. All runs just fine
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 07:20:17PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
Please note passtype is gpg-agent, not simple. I do not have gpg-agent
installed,
Are you 100% sure about that? svn shouldn't be using the gpg-agent
password store if it cannot contact a running gpg-agent.
nor need it. Of
Guten Tag vinoth kumar,
am Montag, 8. Juli 2013 um 15:14 schrieben Sie:
Currently, we are getting error:
svn: E720003: Could not open the requested SVN filesystem
You should provide at least the relevant sections for svn from your
httpd configuration, there surely is some error with
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 03:56:33PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 07:20:17PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
Please note passtype is gpg-agent, not simple. I do not have gpg-agent
installed,
Are you 100% sure about that? svn shouldn't be using the gpg-agent
password
Hello,
How fast would you expect svn checkout to be from a server like one below?
Considering eveyrthing on the server functioning as expected.
Apache 2.2.3
svn version=1.7.8 (r1419691)
128G mem
10G
FSFS is local storage.
Thanks,
--Roman Naumenko
I just had a commit fail midway on three different 1.8 clients without any kind
of error logged in the output, in the client's Event Viewer (Win7,) or on the
repo server's httpd logs (linux.) No dump file either. Starting with a fresh
checkout made no difference. There's no pre-commit hook.
On 08.07.2013 21:31, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 03:56:33PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 07:20:17PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
Please note passtype is gpg-agent, not simple. I do not have gpg-agent
installed,
Are you 100% sure about that? svn
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Naumenko, Roman
roman.naume...@rbccm.com wrote:
Hello,
How fast would you expect svn checkout to be from a server like one below?
Considering eveyrthing on the server functioning as expected.
Apache 2.2.3
svn version=1.7.8 (r1419691)
128G mem
10G
FSFS is
On 08.07.2013 13:47, ВарфоломеевИгорь wrote:
Branko Čibej brane at wandisco.com writes:
I did explain it was a design bug in Subversion on Windows that has been
around more or less forever. What other kind of response did you expect?
Yep, I got that.
And I understand this one, most
On 7/8/2013 11:32 AM, Naumenko, Roman wrote:
Hello,
How fast would you expect svn checkout to be from a server like one
below? Considering eveyrthing on the server functioning as expected.
Our bottleneck is usually the CPU, but we're doing svn+ssh access. So I
lean towards a few less but
On 2013/07/08 12:51 PM, Andy Levy wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Naumenko, Roman
roman.naume...@rbccm.com wrote:
Hello,
How fast would you expect svn checkout to be from a server like one below?
Considering eveyrthing on the server functioning as expected.
Apache 2.2.3
svn
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Naumenko, Roman
roman.naume...@rbccm.com wrote:
On 2013/07/08 2:06 PM, Thomas Harold wrote:
On 7/8/2013 11:32 AM, Naumenko, Roman wrote:
Hello,
How fast would you expect svn checkout to be from a server like one
below? Considering eveyrthing on the server
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Naumenko, Roman
roman.naume...@rbccm.com wrote:
On 2013/07/08 12:51 PM, Andy Levy wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Naumenko, Roman
roman.naume...@rbccm.com wrote:
Hello,
How fast would you expect svn checkout to be from a server like one below?
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Naumenko, Roman
roman.naume...@rbccm.com wrote:
There are certainly a lot of variables. I'm just trying to find out some
baseline.
For example, on one of the other servers it takes 12-13 min to checkout
repo with ~17000 files, total size 1.2G (with average
On 2013/07/08 2:33 PM, Andy Levy wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Naumenko, Roman
roman.naume...@rbccm.com wrote:
On 2013/07/08 12:51 PM, Andy Levy wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Naumenko, Roman
roman.naume...@rbccm.com wrote:
Hello,
How fast would you expect svn checkout to
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Naumenko, Roman
roman.naume...@rbccm.com wrote:
On 2013/07/08 2:33 PM, Andy Levy wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Naumenko, Roman
roman.naume...@rbccm.com wrote:
On 2013/07/08 12:51 PM, Andy Levy wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Naumenko, Roman
On 7/8/2013 2:18 PM, Naumenko, Roman wrote:
That box has more than enough CPUs (forty), cores are barely utilized.
How is the access over ssh can be configured? I thought it's only
http(s) or svn proto.
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.basic.in-action.html#svn.advanced.reposurls
On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 01:39:33PM -0500, Frank Loeffler wrote:
On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 06:34:09PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
By design, there are many cases where the working copy code ends up
searching the directory hierarchy upwards for a wc.db database in
a .svn directory.
Does it
So I tried it today and it turns out that everything works perfectly. The
mistake I did was that the first time I did 'svn up --ignore-externals
user' and I forgot about the --ignore-externals parameter so the next time
('svn up' in 'software') naturally the externals (for 'user') were fetched
as
Branko Čibej brane at wandisco.com writes:
I suggest you add your example to the existing issue:
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1537
Just did that, that's exactly the kind of response I was expecting. :)
I just increased its priority.
Many thanks! I think
Hi Stefan
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 11:18:15PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
This patch is sufficient to make it work in my testing.
Can you confirm?
I can. Thanks a lot!
I downloaded the source of 1.8.0 and compiled that (Debian Wheezy plus a
new copy of serf because I wanted to test using
Howdy.
I was attempting to use TortoiseSVN to view the differences made in the
history of a specific file, when I received the following exception:
---
Subversion Exception!
---
Subversion encountered a serious problem.
Please take the time to
On Mon, 08 Jul 2013 14:33:03 +, Andy Levy wrote:
I just checked out 2400 files, about 1.7GB, and it took just over 19 minutes.
Client I/O speed is a big factor (7200RPM hard drive w/ NTFS in my case).
9550 Files, half a GB wc size, 15 seconds.
You may want to use another file system?
On Mon, 08 Jul 2013 18:06:45 +, Naumenko, Roman wrote:
...
For example, on one of the other servers it takes 12-13 min to checkout
repo with ~17000 files, total size 1.2G (with average speed 2MB/s).
Is it considered good, bad or total disaster in term of svn performance?
To me this
36 matches
Mail list logo
