On 29.07.2013 05:49, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Will this patch break anything? I assume it might break running > davautocheck against an installed svn/apxs pair --- i.e., running > basic_tests.py against /usr/local/bin/apxs and /usr/local/bin/svn, out > of a working copy (or tarball) that not even 'configure' had been run in. > > Thoughts? > > [[[ > Followup to r1507889: > > * subversion/tests/cmdline/davautocheck.sh > (APXS): Stop guessing where APXS might be. configure will have found > it for us. > ]]] > > Index: subversion/tests/cmdline/davautocheck.sh > =================================================================== > --- subversion/tests/cmdline/davautocheck.sh (revision 1507891) > +++ subversion/tests/cmdline/davautocheck.sh (working copy) > @@ -190,10 +190,6 @@ if [ ${APXS:+set} ]; then > elif APXS=$(grep '^APXS' $ABS_BUILDDIR/Makefile | sed 's/^APXS *= *//') && \ > [ -n "$APXS" ]; then > : > -elif APXS=$(which apxs); then > - : > -elif APXS=$(which apxs2); then > - : > else > fail "neither apxs or apxs2 found - required to run davautocheck" > fi
As far as I can see, the code just before the deleted hunk already checks for whatever APXS configure found -- and skips the bits you deleted if configure actually did find it. So I think you'r patch would introduce a bug for exactly the reasons you stated. -- Brane -- Branko Čibej | Director of Subversion WANdisco // Non-Stop Data e. br...@wandisco.com