You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@subversion.apache.org by v4r4n <co...@gmail.com> on 2004/11/22 23:13:39 UTC
Known 'svn ls' bug?
I just copied a file and removed the original (a rename by hand).
I typed 'svn status' to confirm what I'd just done:
D foo_old_name.c
A + foo_new_name.c
Then I randomly typed 'svn ls' and noticed that my newly copied file
was not listed, but the old one was still there.
Also, normal cmd 'ls' just shows the new renamed copy and not the old
deleted file.
It isn't that big of a deal, just making sure this is a known issue
since people to rely on 'svn ls' might freak out.
I'm using svn, version 1.1.1 (r11581) compiled Oct 25 2004, 13:38:36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Known 'svn ls' bug?
Posted by kf...@collab.net.
v4r4n <co...@gmail.com> writes:
> I just copied a file and removed the original (a rename by hand).
>
> I typed 'svn status' to confirm what I'd just done:
>
> D foo_old_name.c
> A + foo_new_name.c
>
> Then I randomly typed 'svn ls' and noticed that my newly copied file
> was not listed, but the old one was still there.
That's surprising...
> Also, normal cmd 'ls' just shows the new renamed copy and not the old
> deleted file.
>
> It isn't that big of a deal, just making sure this is a known issue
> since people to rely on 'svn ls' might freak out.
>
> I'm using svn, version 1.1.1 (r11581) compiled Oct 25 2004, 13:38:36.
Can you show us a full transcript? For example, include the output of
your 'svn ls'. (Well, a reproduction recipe from the very beginning
would be best, starting with 'svnadmin create', if you have time to
construct one.)
Thank you,
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Known 'svn ls' bug?
Posted by v4r4n <co...@gmail.com>.
It was more like:
[sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn copy search.txt new.txt
A new.txt
[sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn rm search.txt
D search.txt
[sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn st
D search.txt
A + new.txt
[sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn ls
DUTCH
foo/
medievia_commands
parental_history
proofbypoem
search.txt
slouch.z5
slouch1
westcoast.jpg
But a move is supposed to be a copy/delete, so the results are not
surprisingly the same.
Just making sure it was known. I don't really use 'svn ls', but it is
there to be used.
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:17:19 -0600, Ben Collins-Sussman
<su...@collab.net> wrote:
>
> On Nov 22, 2004, at 5:13 PM, v4r4n wrote:
>
> > I just copied a file and removed the original (a rename by hand).
> >
> > I typed 'svn status' to confirm what I'd just done:
> >
> > D foo_old_name.c
> > A + foo_new_name.c
> >
> > Then I randomly typed 'svn ls' and noticed that my newly copied file
> > was not listed, but the old one was still there.
> >
>
> Hm, something like this?
>
> [sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn mv search.txt new.txt
> A new.txt
> D search.txt
> [sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn st
> D search.txt
> A + new.txt
> [sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn ls
> DUTCH
> foo/
> medievia_commands
> parental_history
> proofbypoem
> search.txt
> slouch.z5
> slouch1
> westcoast.jpg
>
> I think what's going on here is that 'svn ls' was originally meant to
> be a repository browser -- it only operated on URLs. Then, later on,
> we decided that 'svn ls' on a working-copy path would simply grab the
> underlying URL, and use that. (Which is consistent with other
> commands.)
>
> So 'svn ls' is *always* doing a remote listing.
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
OT: The Game (was: Known 'svn ls' bug?)
Posted by Mark <ma...@msdhub.com>.
You don't happen to have a character in 21 do you?
Though, honestly, I'm playing less now that world of warcraft is out...
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Collins-Sussman [mailto:sussman@collab.net]
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 6:17 PM
To: v4r4n
Cc: users@subversion.tigris.org
Subject: Re: Known 'svn ls' bug?
[sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn ls
...
medievia_commands
...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Known 'svn ls' bug?
Posted by Ben Collins-Sussman <su...@collab.net>.
On Nov 22, 2004, at 5:13 PM, v4r4n wrote:
> I just copied a file and removed the original (a rename by hand).
>
> I typed 'svn status' to confirm what I'd just done:
>
> D foo_old_name.c
> A + foo_new_name.c
>
> Then I randomly typed 'svn ls' and noticed that my newly copied file
> was not listed, but the old one was still there.
>
Hm, something like this?
[sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn mv search.txt new.txt
A new.txt
D search.txt
[sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn st
D search.txt
A + new.txt
[sussman@BenBook:~/scratch/wc]$ svn ls
DUTCH
foo/
medievia_commands
parental_history
proofbypoem
search.txt
slouch.z5
slouch1
westcoast.jpg
I think what's going on here is that 'svn ls' was originally meant to
be a repository browser -- it only operated on URLs. Then, later on,
we decided that 'svn ls' on a working-copy path would simply grab the
underlying URL, and use that. (Which is consistent with other
commands.)
So 'svn ls' is *always* doing a remote listing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org