Hi,
Anyone who can reproduce this issue?
Should I file it in the bug tracker?
Von: Markus Schaber [mailto:m.scha...@3s-software.com]
>
> I have an issue with a working copy where a revert operation failed,
and
> the cleanup operation also fails.
> This issue was caused while using TortoiseSVN 1
I just described my experience inadvertently creating an inconsistent state
between two working copies of the same branch while trying to resolve tree
conflicts over at:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/767763/svn-how-to-resolve-new-tree-conflicts-when-file-is-added-on-two-branches/7100512#710
Could you remind what optimizations those are? Are you suggesting that
they could be pushed down into the svn_ra_replay() implementations?
Thanks,
Daniel
Ivan Zhakov wrote on Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 21:28:31 +0400:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 21:20, Mark Phippard wrote:
> > I thought I recalled w
Hi Stefan,
Stefan Sperling writes:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:55:27PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> I could just be basing it on the original proposal. Maybe that planted the
>> seed with me that it was going to be faster:
>>
>> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2010-07/0154.shtml
>
> The proposa
Hi Bert,
you gave the hint about per-dir optimization, so if you can spare the time,
could you look at r1158491 and see whether you have some more hints?
Thanks!
~Neels
On 08/17/2011 04:45 AM, ne...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: neels
> Date: Wed Aug 17 02:45:42 2011
> New Revision: 1158491
>
> U
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:55:27PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote:
> I could just be basing it on the original proposal. Maybe that planted the
> seed with me that it was going to be faster:
>
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2010-07/0154.shtml
The proposal says:
"it currently performs significantl
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:20:33PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote:
> > I thought I recalled when svnrdump was first created that there were some
> > timing comparisons made with svnsync that showed it to be faster at doing
> a
> > full dump/sy
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:20:33PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote:
> I thought I recalled when svnrdump was first created that there were some
> timing comparisons made with svnsync that showed it to be faster at doing a
> full dump/sync of a remote repository. When I test via HTTP:
>
> svnrdump dump
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 21:20, Mark Phippard wrote:
> > I thought I recalled when svnrdump was first created that there were some
> > timing comparisons made with svnsync that showed it to be faster at doing
> a
> > full dump/sync of a remote
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 21:20, Mark Phippard wrote:
> I thought I recalled when svnrdump was first created that there were some
> timing comparisons made with svnsync that showed it to be faster at doing a
> full dump/sync of a remote repository. When I test via HTTP:
> svnrdump dump http://serve
I thought I recalled when svnrdump was first created that there were some
timing comparisons made with svnsync that showed it to be faster at doing a
full dump/sync of a remote repository. When I test via HTTP:
svnrdump dump http://server/repos | svnadmin load repos
And compare this to an equiva
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Hyrum K Wright
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> > I would like to see us maintain a projected release date for 1.7 once we
> > have moved to the RC phase. Most likely place to put it would be here:
> > http://subversion.apache.org
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> I would like to see us maintain a projected release date for 1.7 once we
> have moved to the RC phase. Most likely place to put it would be here:
> http://subversion.apache.org/roadmap.html
> I think including this date in the RC announcemen
I would like to see us maintain a projected release date for 1.7 once we
have moved to the RC phase. Most likely place to put it would be here:
http://subversion.apache.org/roadmap.html
I think including this date in the RC announcement would make the
announcement stronger and encourage testing,
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>
> I have read up about ctypes and tried to understand in detail what's
> going on here but I've now put it aside as it seems too much of a time
> sink.
Welcome to the wonderful world of bindings maintenance!
-Hyrum
--
uberSVN: Apache Subv
We're down to small-ish bugfixes and a continued lack of blockers, so
it's time to start the Release Candidate train. The
post-tarballs-on-Thursday habit seems to be working, so if there
aren't any complaints, I'll roll 1.7.0-rc1 tomorrow evening, giving
folks today and tomorrow to nominate, revie
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 8:37 PM, 이수민 wrote:
> PLATFORM:
> IBM AIX 5.3 (PPC 32bit)
>
> $ uname -a
> AIX myaixserver 3 5 0005D57A4C00
>
> COMPONENTS:
> apr-1.4.5
> apr-iconv-1.2.1
> apr-util-1.3.12
> sqlite-amalgamation-3070701
> zlib-1.2.5
>
> CONFIGURATIONS:
> ./configure --prefix=/home/c
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:03:09PM +0200, Bert Huijben wrote:
> > +static svn_error_t *
> > +revert_restore_handle_copied_file(svn_node_kind_t *new_kind,
> > + svn_wc__db_t *db,
> > + const char *local_abspath,
> > +
Just to follow up here, this isn't specifically a self-reference
problem. I wonder if it's a problem of by-value vs. by-reference
semantics.
I have read up about ctypes and tried to understand in detail what's
going on here but I've now put it aside as it seems too much of a time
sink.
- Julian
In the ctypes-python bindings, when I try to use the Stream class
(either via the RemoteRepository.cat() method, or just on its own), I
find that the program crashes at the moment the C code in
svn_stream_write() calls the callback function which is provided by
subversion/bindings/ctypes-python/csv
> -Original Message-
> From: s...@apache.org [mailto:s...@apache.org]
> Sent: woensdag 17 augustus 2011 12:33
> To: comm...@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: svn commit: r1158617 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion: libsvn_wc/
> tests/cmdline/
>
> Author: stsp
> Date: Wed Aug 17 10:33:12 2011
Hello,
I have an issue with a working copy where a revert operation failed, and
the cleanup operation also fails.
This issue was caused while using TortoiseSVN 1.7 beta 2 (TortoiseSVN
1.6.99, Build 21735 - 32), but the failure to cleanup the working copy
persists with svn.exe version 1.7.0-beta3 (
Hi again,
Just got some private feedback from another user that I want to convey as
it seems important for reproduction:
..."that SVN update seems to work
if done for the single external file directly and not for the parent
folder."...
Does that help reproduction?
/Nicke
> Hi,
>
> While taking
+1; let's identify problems /throughout/ the 1.8 release release cycle,
rather than only at 1.8 stabilization.
Greg Stein wrote on Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:56:34 -0400:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:30, wrote:
> > Author: gstein
> > Date: Wed Aug 17 05:30:23 2011
> > New Revision: 1158522
> >
> >
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 04:13, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:56:34AM -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:30, wrote:
>> > Author: gstein
>> > Date: Wed Aug 17 05:30:23 2011
>> > New Revision: 1158522
>> >
>> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1158522&
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:56:34AM -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:30, wrote:
> > Author: gstein
> > Date: Wed Aug 17 05:30:23 2011
> > New Revision: 1158522
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1158522&view=rev
> > Log:
> > IMO, issue 3979 should be fixed if ra_ser
26 matches
Mail list logo
