You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Lieven Govaerts <sv...@mobsol.be> on 2006/09/21 21:00:52 UTC
[PATCH] fix for issue 2486, needs review.
Hi,
attached you'll find a patch for issue 2486, which describes a problem
where svn status -uN wc/A fails to show remote changes in the folder A.
I see that all current stat_tests pass, so that's good. Problem is that
I don't understand the impact of the changes I made.
By looking at the patch you'll notice that at least part of it is caused
by an extra check that was added for issue 2122. While looking at the
code I just removed that test expecting issue 2122 to reappear, but that
didn't happen. So I'm wondering whether issue 2122 was solved somewhere
auto magically or I'm just not seeing that issue on my machine(?)
regards,
Lieven.
Re: [PATCH] fix for issue 2468
Posted by Lieven Govaerts <sv...@mobsol.be>.
This patch isn't up to date anymore with the latest changes in
libsvn_wc/update.c. I'll update it later this week.
Lieven.
Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> Lieven Govaerts wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've updated this patch to the last revision on trunk. Since a part of
>> this patch was committed in r21638 as part of another fix, the remaining
>> patch is now much simpler.
>> Note that I mistyped the issue number in the previous topic of the mail.
>>
>
> Ping...
>
> Could a committer take a look at this patch? If nothing happens with in
> the next few days, I'll file an issue.
>
> -Hyrum
>
>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> attached you'll find a patch for issue 2486, which describes a problem
>>> where svn status -uN wc/A fails to show remote changes in the folder A.
>>>
>>> I see that all current stat_tests pass, so that's good. Problem is
>>> that I don't understand the impact of the changes I made.
>>>
>>> By looking at the patch you'll notice that at least part of it is
>>> caused by an extra check that was added for issue 2122. While looking
>>> at the code I just removed that test expecting issue 2122 to reappear,
>>> but that didn't happen. So I'm wondering whether issue 2122 was solved
>>> somewhere auto magically or I'm just not seeing that issue on my
>>> machine(?)
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Lieven.
>>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Index: subversion/libsvn_wc/status.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- subversion/libsvn_wc/status.c (revision 21640)
>> +++ subversion/libsvn_wc/status.c (working copy)
>> @@ -1599,7 +1599,7 @@
>>
>> /* Handle this directory's statuses, and then note in the parent
>> that this has been done. */
>> - if (pb && eb->descend)
>> + if (pb)
>> {
>> svn_boolean_t was_deleted = FALSE;
>>
>> @@ -1612,13 +1612,13 @@
>>
>> /* Now do the status reporting. */
>> SVN_ERR(handle_statii(eb, dir_status ? dir_status->entry : NULL,
>> - db->path, db->statii, was_deleted, TRUE, pool));
>> + db->path, db->statii, was_deleted, eb->descend,
>> + pool));
>> if (dir_status && is_sendable_status(dir_status, eb))
>> (eb->status_func)(eb->status_baton, db->path, dir_status);
>> apr_hash_set(pb->statii, db->path, APR_HASH_KEY_STRING, NULL);
>> }
>> - else if (! pb)
>> - {
>> + else {
>> /* If this is the top-most directory, and the operation had a
>> target, we should only report the target. */
>> if (*eb->target)
>> Index: subversion/tests/cmdline/stat_tests.py
>> ===================================================================
>> --- subversion/tests/cmdline/stat_tests.py (revision 21640)
>> +++ subversion/tests/cmdline/stat_tests.py (working copy)
>> @@ -1141,7 +1141,7 @@
>> status_add_plus_conflict,
>> inconsistent_eol,
>> status_update_with_incoming_props,
>> - XFail(status_nonrecursive_update),
>> + status_nonrecursive_update,
>> ]
>>
>> if __name__ == '__main__':
>>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] fix for issue 2468
Posted by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>.
Lieven Govaerts wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've updated this patch to the last revision on trunk. Since a part of
> this patch was committed in r21638 as part of another fix, the remaining
> patch is now much simpler.
> Note that I mistyped the issue number in the previous topic of the mail.
Ping...
Could a committer take a look at this patch? If nothing happens with in
the next few days, I'll file an issue.
-Hyrum
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> attached you'll find a patch for issue 2486, which describes a problem
>> where svn status -uN wc/A fails to show remote changes in the folder A.
>>
>> I see that all current stat_tests pass, so that's good. Problem is
>> that I don't understand the impact of the changes I made.
>>
>> By looking at the patch you'll notice that at least part of it is
>> caused by an extra check that was added for issue 2122. While looking
>> at the code I just removed that test expecting issue 2122 to reappear,
>> but that didn't happen. So I'm wondering whether issue 2122 was solved
>> somewhere auto magically or I'm just not seeing that issue on my
>> machine(?)
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Lieven.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Index: subversion/libsvn_wc/status.c
> ===================================================================
> --- subversion/libsvn_wc/status.c (revision 21640)
> +++ subversion/libsvn_wc/status.c (working copy)
> @@ -1599,7 +1599,7 @@
>
> /* Handle this directory's statuses, and then note in the parent
> that this has been done. */
> - if (pb && eb->descend)
> + if (pb)
> {
> svn_boolean_t was_deleted = FALSE;
>
> @@ -1612,13 +1612,13 @@
>
> /* Now do the status reporting. */
> SVN_ERR(handle_statii(eb, dir_status ? dir_status->entry : NULL,
> - db->path, db->statii, was_deleted, TRUE, pool));
> + db->path, db->statii, was_deleted, eb->descend,
> + pool));
> if (dir_status && is_sendable_status(dir_status, eb))
> (eb->status_func)(eb->status_baton, db->path, dir_status);
> apr_hash_set(pb->statii, db->path, APR_HASH_KEY_STRING, NULL);
> }
> - else if (! pb)
> - {
> + else {
> /* If this is the top-most directory, and the operation had a
> target, we should only report the target. */
> if (*eb->target)
> Index: subversion/tests/cmdline/stat_tests.py
> ===================================================================
> --- subversion/tests/cmdline/stat_tests.py (revision 21640)
> +++ subversion/tests/cmdline/stat_tests.py (working copy)
> @@ -1141,7 +1141,7 @@
> status_add_plus_conflict,
> inconsistent_eol,
> status_update_with_incoming_props,
> - XFail(status_nonrecursive_update),
> + status_nonrecursive_update,
> ]
>
> if __name__ == '__main__':
Re: [PATCH] fix for issue 2468 (was: [PATCH] fix for issue 2486,
needs review).
Posted by Lieven Govaerts <sv...@mobsol.be>.
Hi,
I've updated this patch to the last revision on trunk. Since a part of
this patch was committed in r21638 as part of another fix, the remaining
patch is now much simpler.
Note that I mistyped the issue number in the previous topic of the mail.
regards,
Lieven.
> Hi,
>
>
> attached you'll find a patch for issue 2486, which describes a problem
> where svn status -uN wc/A fails to show remote changes in the folder A.
>
> I see that all current stat_tests pass, so that's good. Problem is
> that I don't understand the impact of the changes I made.
>
> By looking at the patch you'll notice that at least part of it is
> caused by an extra check that was added for issue 2122. While looking
> at the code I just removed that test expecting issue 2122 to reappear,
> but that didn't happen. So I'm wondering whether issue 2122 was solved
> somewhere auto magically or I'm just not seeing that issue on my
> machine(?)
>
> regards,
>
> Lieven.