add vs delete question

[Oblio <su...@locustcreek.com>]

I've got a question about a passage in the online 
book.  In chapter 7: vendor
branches, it states,

"To perform this upgrade, we checkout a copy of 
our
vendor branch, and replace the code in the 
current directory with the new
libcomplex 1.1 
source code. We quite literally copy new files on 
top of
existing files, perhaps exploding the 
libcomplex 1.1 release tarball atop our
existing 
files and directories. The goal here is to make 
our current
directory contain only the libcomplex 
1.1 code, and to ensure that all that
code is 
under version control. Oh, and we want to do this 
with as little
version control history disturbance as possible.

After replacing the 1.0 code
with 1.1 code, svn 
status will show files with local modifications 
as well
as, perhaps, some unversioned or missing 
files. If we did what we were
supposed to do, the 
unversioned files are only those new files 
introduced in
the 1.1 release of libcomplex­we 
run svn add on those to get them under
version 
control. The missing files are files that were in 
1.0 but not in
1.1, and on those paths we run svn 
delete. Finally, once our current working
copy 
contains only the libcomplex 1.1 code, we commit 
the changes we made to
get it looking that way."

Now, I've highlighted the part that doesn't seem
to fit.  The 'add' command is pretty simple and 
straight-forward; it will
find missing 
files/directories and put them under version 
control.  However,
if I've just exploded a 
tarball over the top of my code, it doesn't
automatically mark things to be deleted.  I would 
actually have to expand it
to a different 
directory and run some utility to find missing 
files, compile
that into a script and run the 
'delete' command using the script.

Am I
correct?  Or is there an easier way?

Re: add vs delete question

[Russ <rs...@istandfor.com>]

You could check out the original library from source control, the delete everything in that folder save for the .svn folders, and then untar the new version of the library into that folder.  This might prove a little more difficult with multiple subfolders, but its doable.

Sent wirelessly via BlackBerry from T-Mobile.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Oblio <su...@locustcreek.com>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 09:42:20 
To:users@subversion.tigris.org
Subject:  add vs delete question

I've got a question about a passage in the online book.  In chapter 7: vendor branches, it states,

 "To perform this upgrade, we checkout a copy of our vendor branch, and replace the code in the current directory with the new libcomplex 1.1 source code. We quite literally copy new files on top of existing files, perhaps exploding the libcomplex 1.1 release tarball atop our existing files and directories. The goal here is to make our current directory contain only the libcomplex 1.1 code, and to ensure that all that code is under version control. Oh, and we want to do this with as little version control history disturbance as possible.

 After replacing the 1.0 code with 1.1 code, svn status will show files with local modifications as well as, perhaps, some unversioned or missing files. If we did what we were supposed to do, the unversioned files are only those new files introduced in the 1.1 release of libcomplex­we run svn add on those to get them under version control. The missing files are files that were in 1.0 but not in 1.1, and on those paths we run svn delete. Finally, once our current working copy contains only the libcomplex 1.1 code, we commit the changes we made to get it looking that way."

 Now, I've highlighted the part that doesn't seem to fit.  The 'add' command is pretty simple and straight-forward; it will find missing files/directories and put them under version control.  However, if I've just exploded a tarball over the top of my code, it doesn't automatically mark things to be deleted.  I would actually have to expand it to a different directory and run some utility to find missing files, compile that into a script and run the 'delete' command using the script.

 Am I correct?  Or is there an easier way?