Re: RFC: Build system changes

2012-12-13 Thread Branko Čibej
On 14.12.2012 07:38, Miha Vitorovic wrote: > On 14.12.2012 4:21, Branko Čibej wrote: >> The only reason for trying for C++11 is, as far as I'm concerned, >> getting std::shared_ptr . The C++ bindings I'm slowly >> wrapping my head around will need it, and I don't want to even >> consider using stan

Re: RFC: Build system changes

2012-12-13 Thread Miha Vitorovic
On 14.12.2012 4:21, Branko Čibej wrote: The only reason for trying for C++11 is, as far as I'm concerned, getting std::shared_ptr . The C++ bindings I'm slowly wrapping my head around will need it, and I don't want to even consider using standard containers without it. The only alternative to C

Re: RFC: Build system changes

2012-12-13 Thread Greg Stein
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:21 PM, Branko Čibej wrote: >... > P.S.: Nothing wrong with Boost as such, of course; but including > tends to pull in some 90% of Boost's headers, and > I consider that overkill. I'll go on record with "Boost is the Automake of C++. Tons of useless crap that you don't

Re: RFC: Build system changes

2012-12-13 Thread Branko Čibej
On 14.12.2012 02:32, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Branko Čibej wrote: > >> The attached patch makes several changes to how we discover compilers >> and set flags on *nix: >> >> * Search for clang as well as the default gcc/cc, and prefer clang(++) >> over gcc/g++.

Re: RFC: Build system changes

2012-12-13 Thread Hyrum K Wright
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Branko Čibej wrote: > The attached patch makes several changes to how we discover compilers > and set flags on *nix: > > * Search for clang as well as the default gcc/cc, and prefer clang(++) > over gcc/g++. > * Set standards-compliance mode (C90/C++11) ev

1.8 Release Status : Test Review Task

2012-12-13 Thread Paul Burba
Per the 1.8 Release Status 'Test Review' item on the roadmap, we're in pretty good shape (at least compared to where we were at a similar time for 1.7). Here's where we stand re XFail and WIP tests that need to be fixed before release: Of all the XFailing tests *with* an associated issue, there i

Re: 1.8 Progress

2012-12-13 Thread Paul Burba
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Paul Burba wrote: > On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 06:00:52PM -0400, Paul Burba wrote: >>> These six XFailing upate tests are all part of this effort correct? >>> >>> 61XFAIL update locally moved dir with leaf

Re: svn commit: r1409652 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/patch_tests.py

2012-12-13 Thread Paul Burba
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 12:40 AM, wrote: > Author: danielsh > Date: Thu Nov 15 05:40:40 2012 > New Revision: 1409652 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1409652&view=rev > Log: > Add a skeleton XFail test. There is no issue number yet, but the bug is being > discussed on users@. Hi Daniel

Re: svn commit: r1417639 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/mod_dav_svn: dav_svn.h mod_dav_svn.c reports/update.c

2012-12-13 Thread Lieven Govaerts
Mike, On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:06 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > On 12/13/2012 05:48 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 4:24 PM, C. Michael Pilato > > wrote: >> >> Here's a question I've been wondering for some time: should we expose to >>

Re: svn commit: r1417639 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/mod_dav_svn: dav_svn.h mod_dav_svn.c reports/update.c

2012-12-13 Thread C. Michael Pilato
On 12/13/2012 05:48 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 4:24 PM, C. Michael Pilato > wrote: > > Here's a question I've been wondering for some time: should we expose to > users a configuration option for declaring the number of aux connectio

Re: svn commit: r1417926 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc: externals.c merge.c props.c props.h update_editor.c

2012-12-13 Thread Julian Foad
Philip Martin wrote: >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1417926&view=rev >> Log: >> Remove the 'base_merge' parameter from svn_wc__merge_props(), >> instead doing a 'base merge' iff the 'new_pristine_props' >> output parameter is given, for simplicity. > I think this change is causing

Re: 1.7.8 up for testing/signing

2012-12-13 Thread Julian Foad
Ben Reser wrote: > The 1.7.8 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing. Summary:   +1 to release Platform:   Linux (Ubuntu 11.10) Tested:   [ bdb | fsfs ] x [ ra_local | ra_svn | ra_neon | ra_serf ]   swig-py   swig-pl   swig-rb   ctypes-python   javahl Results:   All tests PA

Re: RFC: Build system changes

2012-12-13 Thread Peter Samuelson
> * Search for clang as well as the default gcc/cc, and prefer clang(++) > over gcc/g++. Is clang considered superior, then? Fair enough, I haven't really kept up. > * Add -pipe to C(XX)FLAGS if the compiler supports it. This speeds up > compilation a bit in my tests. Hmm. It seem

Re: RFC: Build system changes

2012-12-13 Thread Philip Martin
Branko Čibej writes: > {{{ > * build/ac-macros/compiler.m4: New file. > (SVN_PROG_CC, SVN_CFLAGS_ADD_IFELSE, >SVN_PROG_CXX, SVN_CXXFLAGS_ADD_IFELSE): New. > * aclocal.m4: Include build/ac-macros/compiler.m4. > > * configure.ac: > - Use SVN_PROG_CC instead of AC_PROG_CC > - Use SVN_PROG_

RFC: Build system changes

2012-12-13 Thread Branko Čibej
The attached patch makes several changes to how we discover compilers and set flags on *nix: * Search for clang as well as the default gcc/cc, and prefer clang(++) over gcc/g++. * Set standards-compliance mode (C90/C++11) even without maintainer-mode. * Add -pipe to C(XX)FLAGS if the com

Re: [PATCH] Code refactoring in svn_ra_serf__replay_range()

2012-12-13 Thread C. Michael Pilato
On 12/13/2012 09:53 AM, vijay wrote: > Hi, > > This patch uses an existing function(svn_ra_serf__context_run_wait) instead > of in-line code for processing the connections defined by the serf context. > > Attached the patch and log message. Looks good. I did some additional cleanup of comments

[PATCH] Code refactoring in svn_ra_serf__replay_range()

2012-12-13 Thread vijay
Hi, This patch uses an existing function(svn_ra_serf__context_run_wait) instead of in-line code for processing the connections defined by the serf context. Attached the patch and log message. Thanks & Regards, Vijayaguru Index: subversion/libsvn_ra_serf/replay.c =

Re: 1.7.8 up for testing/signing

2012-12-13 Thread Philip Martin
Summary: +1 to release Platform: Linux (Debian/wheezy) Tested: (local, svn, svn+sasl, serf, neon) x (fsfs, fsfs/pack/shard, bdb) (serf/v1, neon/v1) x (fsfs, bdb) swig-pl, swig-py, swig-rb javahl x (fsfs, bdb) Results: All tests PASS Local dependencies: apache2-threaded-dev

Re: mod_dav_svn assert on root location

2012-12-13 Thread Philip Martin
Daniel Shahaf writes: > Do you plan to work on this, or should I apply the patch I posted > elsethread? I'm not working on it. -- Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads: http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download

Re: mod_dav_svn assert on root location

2012-12-13 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Philip Martin wrote on Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 14:13:34 +: > Erez Zarum writes: > > > I am trying to create a master slave configuration with proxy requests > > through the slave, i have used this configuration on the slave: > > > > DAV svn > >

Re: [PATCH] Test for line ending bug in svnrdump (issue 4263)

2012-12-13 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > P.S. This thread was an unusually long one, for a patch that adds about > a dozen lines of code. > Uh, how is that at all unusual for this crowd? =) -- justin

Re: svn commit: r1417639 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/mod_dav_svn: dav_svn.h mod_dav_svn.c reports/update.c

2012-12-13 Thread Justin Erenkrantz
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 4:24 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > Here's a question I've been wondering for some time: should we expose to > users a configuration option for declaring the number of aux connections > ra_serf should use? I mean, Firefox has exposed such an option for years. > If we did