Re: 'svn patch' issue

2010-07-09 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 12:52:24PM +0300, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > # no changes between 'diff' and 'patch', so hope for idempotency: > # for 'patch' to realize the patch is applied and does nothing. Now I understand. We don't check for already applied patches right now. Your patch matches with fuzz

Re: 'svn patch' issue

2010-07-09 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Stefan Sperling wrote on Fri, 9 Jul 2010 at 11:43 +0200: > On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 12:47:05AM +0300, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > Working on #3641. I had a changelist containing svnsync_tests.py, two > > dumpfiles (for the test), and libsvn_repos/replay.c. > > > > I saved a diff of the whole CL as .

Re: 'svn patch' issue

2010-07-09 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 12:47:05AM +0300, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Working on #3641. I had a changelist containing svnsync_tests.py, two > dumpfiles (for the test), and libsvn_repos/replay.c. > > I saved a diff of the whole CL as ../i3.diff. > > I 'svn revert'ed replay.c and rebuilt. > > I then

'svn patch' issue

2010-07-08 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Working on #3641. I had a changelist containing svnsync_tests.py, two dumpfiles (for the test), and libsvn_repos/replay.c. I saved a diff of the whole CL as ../i3.diff. I 'svn revert'ed replay.c and rebuilt. I then ran 'svn patch ../i3.diff'. Result: one hunk was forcefully re-applied, even t