You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Daniel Näslund <da...@longitudo.com> on 2010/04/02 11:06:32 UTC
Re: [PATCH] v4 Fix svnversion message as follow-up to r922176
We're running out of patch versions here ...
gstein pointed out that I should use SVN_IS_VALID_REVNUM(). Fixed!
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:59:15AM +0200, Daniel N�slund wrote:
> Mispelled Uncommitted with one 't'. This patch corrects that.
>
> On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:36:53AM +0200, Daniel N�slund wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 11:04:13PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:14:42PM +0200, Daniel N�slund wrote:
> > > > Ping! This patch has not been reviewed!
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 09:38:15PM +0100, Daniel N�slund wrote:
> > > > > Hi!
> > > > >
> > > > > The 1.6 svnversion message was "'path' not versioned, and not exported".
> > > > > But on trunk more than one message has been changed. My first thought
> > > > > was that we should be backward compat in our output but if changes of
> > > > > those messages are ok I'm supplying one.
> > > > >
> > > > > In case we will use new messages, the help text must be updated. It
> > > > > talks of 'exported' but those are not used in the new messages.
> > > > >
> > > > > [[[
> > > > > After the changes in r922176, versioned but not yet committed files were
> > > > > not properly detected. Fixed now!
> > > > >
> > > > > * subversion/svnversion/main.c
> > > > > (main): Check for invalid rev nr for files and dirs.
> > > > >
> > > > > * subversion/tests/cmdline/svnversion_tests.py
> > > > > (structural_changes): New.
> > > > > (tests_list): Add new test.
> > > > > ]]]
Re: [PATCH] v4 Fix svnversion message as follow-up to r922176
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 11:06:32AM +0200, Daniel Näslund wrote:
> gstein pointed out that I should use SVN_IS_VALID_REVNUM(). Fixed!
> @@ -290,6 +290,16 @@ main(int argc, const char *argv[])
> return EXIT_FAILURE;
> }
>
> + if (SVN_IS_VALID_REVNUM(res->min_rev))
Doesn't this reverse the meaning of what you had before?
Maybe use:
if (! SVN_IS_VALID_REVNUM(res->min_rev))
or use
if (SVN_IS_INVALID_REVNUM(res->min_rev))
if there is such a macro.
> + {
> + /* Local uncommited modifications, no revision info was found. */
> + SVN_INT_ERR(svn_cmdline_printf(pool, _("Uncommitted local addition "
> + "copy, or move%s"),
> + no_newline ? "" : "\n"));
> + svn_pool_destroy(pool);
> + return EXIT_SUCCESS;
> + }
> +
> /* Build compact '123[:456]M?S?' string. */
> SVN_INT_ERR(svn_cmdline_printf(pool, "%ld", res->min_rev));
> if (res->min_rev != res->max_rev)
Re: [PATCH] v4 Fix svnversion message as follow-up to r922176
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 11:06:32AM +0200, Daniel Näslund wrote:
> gstein pointed out that I should use SVN_IS_VALID_REVNUM(). Fixed!
> @@ -290,6 +290,16 @@ main(int argc, const char *argv[])
> return EXIT_FAILURE;
> }
>
> + if (SVN_IS_VALID_REVNUM(res->min_rev))
Doesn't this reverse the meaning of what you had before?
Maybe use:
if (! SVN_IS_VALID_REVNUM(res->min_rev))
or use
if (SVN_IS_INVALID_REVNUM(res->min_rev))
if there is such a macro.
> + {
> + /* Local uncommited modifications, no revision info was found. */
> + SVN_INT_ERR(svn_cmdline_printf(pool, _("Uncommitted local addition "
> + "copy, or move%s"),
> + no_newline ? "" : "\n"));
> + svn_pool_destroy(pool);
> + return EXIT_SUCCESS;
> + }
> +
> /* Build compact '123[:456]M?S?' string. */
> SVN_INT_ERR(svn_cmdline_printf(pool, "%ld", res->min_rev));
> if (res->min_rev != res->max_rev)