Graham Bloice wrote:
> Ulf Lamping wrote:
>   
>> Joerg Mayer wrote:
>>     
>>> Moin List,
>>>
>>> I just wanted to fix
>>> http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=429
>>> Instead of reverse engineering the .svn/entries format for svn 1.4 I
>>> decided to ask the developers of svn about it, and they strongly
>>> discouraged such a practice. They asked whether it was unacceptable to
>>> require developers working with svn anyway to install svnversion (which
>>> has some nice side effects, just run with --help). Considering the
>>> amount of work that has to go into this (and it may happen again and
>>> again) I'd like to think that it is indeed ok to require svnversion in
>>> $PATH, but then, I'm on a platform where svnversion is installed anyway.
>>> Btw, svnversion doesn't change its output depending on language
>>> settings.
>>>
>>>  Ciao
>>>       Joerg
>>>   
>>>       
>> And now it get's ugly ;-)
>>
>> If I try to use svnversion (in the WS sources dir) under cygwin I get:
>>
>> svn: This client is too old to work with working copy '.'; please get a 
>> newer Subversion client
>>
>> This is due to the fact that I'm using TortoiseSVN (SVN 1.4.x) on my 
>> everyday work but the cygwin version in the PATH is still "svnversion, 
>> version 1.3.2 (r19776) compiled Jul 14 2006, 22:16:08."
>>
>> Although I agree that svnversion is the way to go in principle, it will 
>> produce new problems on the Win32 platform :-(
>>
>> Any ideas welcome ...
>>
>>     
>
>
> AFAIK there is no specific svn client recommendation for Win32 Wireshark
>  work, then maybe it should be set to the svn command line tools, which
> would ensure svnversion is available.  If developers then want to use
> additional tools so be it.
>
>   
There is one svn client mentioned in section 2.13.2 "Win32 native: 
TortoiseSVN" of the Wireshark developers guide ( 
http://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsdg_html/#ChToolsTortoiseSVN ).

/ Peter
_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev

Reply via email to