Re: [PATCH] fix for diff optimization bug

Hi. > It would be very useful to have a regression test for the bug that you have > found.? Would you be able to convert your reproduction recipe into a > regression test written in C like the that one on trunk? > Please let us know if you would be willing to write a test for the bug you > foun

Re: [PATCH] fix for diff optimization bug

Hi, Hideki.  Thank you very much for finding this bug and a fix for it. You might be interested to know that on the 'trunk', a new test has already been added for a similar problem: $ ./subversion/tests/libsvn_diff/diff-diff3-test --list [...]   13    XFAIL  difference at the start of a 128KB wi

Re: svn commit: r1425371 - /subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS

On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 3:38 PM, wrote: > Author: rhuijben > Date: Sat Dec 22 23:38:08 2012 > New Revision: 1425371 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1425371&view=rev > Log: > * STATUS: Update r1425368 justification > > Modified: > subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS > > Modified: subver

[PATCH] fix for diff optimization bug

Hi, Subversion developers. The optimization of diff inclued in version 1.7 has a bug that produces incorrect diff on a certain condition. The attached patch fix it. diffstat: subversion/libsvn_diff/diff_file.c |6 -- 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Detail of the bug -

Re: Nested working copies in SVN 1.7.x+ question

On 24.12.2012 03:35, Vladimir Berezniker wrote: > Hi All, > > I ran into some issues with SVN tests for JavaHL, as test WCs end up > nested within the branch WC. So I am curious to understand what the > official stance is, are nested working copies a supported use case? > > If this use case is sup