You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Alexis Huxley <ah...@gmx.net> on 2002/05/23 08:04:47 UTC

commit failure after 'svn rm' + 'rm', ok after 'svn rm' only, why? (0.10.2)

Hi Subversion People 

I do this:

	dione$ svn co http://dione/svn/lcuinv
	A ....

And then I delete some stuff I hadn't meant to have archived the
previous time:

	dione$ cd lcuinv/rlscfg/ 
	dione$ ls -l
	total 140
	-rw-r--r--    1 alexis   alexis       1353 May 23 09:53 files.spp
	drwxr-xr-x    8 alexis   alexis       4096 May 23 09:53 lcuinv-0.1f
	-rw-r--r--    1 alexis   alexis      55970 May 23 09:53 lcuinv-0.1f.tar.gz
	drwxr-xr-x    8 alexis   alexis       4096 May 23 09:53 lcuinv-0.2
	-rw-r--r--    1 alexis   alexis      61606 May 23 09:53 lcuinv-0.2.tar.gz
	dione$ svn rm *-*
	D ....

If I then really remove the files (which I'm allowed to do now that I've
told SVN about it, right?) with:

	dione$ rm -fr *-*

Then the commit which follows simply hangs without any message but eats
CPU:

	dione$ svn commit
				<-- long pause before I background it
	<CTRL-Z>
	dione$ bg

Here's 'top':

  	  PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
	25220 alexis    19   0  1384 1384  1108 R    93.9  1.0   0:34 svn

But if repeat the whole procedure, running 'svn rm' but not the real
'rm' then the commit works fine.

Why?

Thanks!

Alexis
At repository revision 34 :-)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: commit failure after 'svn rm' + 'rm', ok after 'svn rm' only, why? (0.10.2)

Posted by Philip Martin <ph...@codematters.co.uk>.
Alexis Huxley <ah...@gmx.net> writes:

> I do this:
> 
> 	dione$ svn co http://dione/svn/lcuinv
> 	A ....
> 
> And then I delete some stuff I hadn't meant to have archived the
> previous time:
> 
> 	dione$ cd lcuinv/rlscfg/ 
> 	dione$ ls -l
> 	total 140
> 	-rw-r--r--    1 alexis   alexis       1353 May 23 09:53 files.spp
> 	drwxr-xr-x    8 alexis   alexis       4096 May 23 09:53 lcuinv-0.1f
> 	-rw-r--r--    1 alexis   alexis      55970 May 23 09:53 lcuinv-0.1f.tar.gz
> 	drwxr-xr-x    8 alexis   alexis       4096 May 23 09:53 lcuinv-0.2
> 	-rw-r--r--    1 alexis   alexis      61606 May 23 09:53 lcuinv-0.2.tar.gz
> 	dione$ svn rm *-*
> 	D ....
> 
> If I then really remove the files (which I'm allowed to do now that I've
> told SVN about it, right?) with:
> 
> 	dione$ rm -fr *-*
> 

Current Subversion HEAD will remove files from the working copy
immediately when you run 'svn rm' on them. You won't need (or be able)
to run ordinary rm separately.

-- 
Philip

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: commit failure after 'svn rm' + 'rm', ok after 'svn rm' only, why? (0.10.2)

Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>.
On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 07:51:35AM -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> Alexis Huxley <ah...@gmx.net> writes:
> 
> > As a consequence: if I upgrade from 0.10.2 to rev 2000 then is my
> > existing archive compatible with rev 2000, or should I checkout everything, 
> > rm .svn's from WC, and reimport? 
> 
> You'll be fine.  In the 9 months since SVN has been self-hosting,
> we've only broken repository compatibility twice.  (It's been a few
> months since the last time.)  When we do so, we make sure to announce
> it LOUDLY and tell people how to upgrade.  Such a time is coming up,
> incidentally, with the next milestone.  :-)

Right. The repository is quite compatible.

However, you *should* check out a fresh working copy.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: commit failure after 'svn rm' + 'rm', ok after 'svn rm' only, why? (0.10.2)

Posted by Ben Collins-Sussman <su...@collab.net>.
Alexis Huxley <ah...@gmx.net> writes:

> As a consequence: if I upgrade from 0.10.2 to rev 2000 then is my
> existing archive compatible with rev 2000, or should I checkout everything, 
> rm .svn's from WC, and reimport? 

You'll be fine.  In the 9 months since SVN has been self-hosting,
we've only broken repository compatibility twice.  (It's been a few
months since the last time.)  When we do so, we make sure to announce
it LOUDLY and tell people how to upgrade.  Such a time is coming up,
incidentally, with the next milestone.  :-)


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: commit failure after 'svn rm' + 'rm', ok after 'svn rm' only, why? (0.10.2)

Posted by Alexis Huxley <ah...@gmx.net>.
> > Subject: commit failure after 'svn rm' + 'rm', ok after 'svn rm' only,
> > why? (0.10.2)
>        ^^^^^^^^
> 
> Could you repeat your scenario with the HEAD revision (we're at rev 2000
> atm)?  I think there were fixes in this area after the 0.10.2 tarball.

Sure; gimme 48 hours and I'll get/compile/install and repeat the test.

As a consequence: if I upgrade from 0.10.2 to rev 2000 then is my
existing archive compatible with rev 2000, or should I checkout everything, 
rm .svn's from WC, and reimport? I don't care about losing the history since 
I'm only ...

Alexis
At repository revision 35 :-)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

RE: commit failure after 'svn rm' + 'rm', ok after 'svn rm' only, why? (0.10.2)

Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> From: Alexis Huxley [mailto:ahuxley@gmx.net]
> Sent: 23 May 2002 10:05
> To: Subversion Developers
> Subject: commit failure after 'svn rm' + 'rm', ok after 'svn rm' only,
> why? (0.10.2)
       ^^^^^^^^
 
Hi,

Could you repeat your scenario with the HEAD revision (we're at rev 2000
atm)?  I think there were fixes in this area after the 0.10.2 tarball.


Sander


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org