[Bert Huijben]
> Do we need a backport of this fix to 1.6.x?
Created and nominated branch 1.6.x-r898963.
Peter
[Bert Huijben]
> Do we need a backport of this fix to 1.6.x?
Hmmm - yeah - I guess it would be an easy backport to vote on. Even
though, as you say, the fix doesn't literally merge cleanly. I'll try
and remember to propose it tonight, when I have time to do the whole
backport branch thing.
Pet
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Samuelson [mailto:pe...@p12n.org]
> Sent: woensdag 13 januari 2010 23:07
> To: dev@subversion.apache.org; Edgar Fuß
> Subject: Re: Issue 3501: Repositories mounted on NFS don't work
>
>
> [Bert Huijben]
&g
[Bert Huijben]
> I think it is easier to use svn_io_get_dirents2() then this block
> replicating its implementation.
Indeed it is easier. It took me several days to get around to testing
and committing - r898963.
Peter
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Samuelson [mailto:pe...@p12n.org]
> Sent: donderdag 7 januari 2010 2:30
> To: Edgar Fuß
> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Issue 3501: Repositories mounted on NFS don't work
>
>
> [Edgar Fuß]
> &g
[Peter Samuelson]
> Something like the following (untested) against 1.6.x.
Well, it almost worked. Here's one, also for 1.6.x, that seems to pass
the tests. Edgar, can you test this on your NFS client?
I'll commit the trunk version of this soon if no one objects. It
shouldn't need a new test;
[Edgar Fuß]
> To summarise the problem: recursive directory deletion fails because entries
> re-appear after dir rewinding. The fix may be as easy as ignoring ENOENT.
Or not calling rewind. Something like the following (untested) against
1.6.x. Same patch applies to trunk except for some confli
Hello,
may I humbly ask what the state of affairs rergarding Issue #3501 is?
For me, ths problem forces us to stay with Subversion 1.4.
Is the issue considered fixed, irrelevant, non-reproducable, a NetBSD problem,
a non-issue or not severe enough to be fixed?
To summarise the problem: recursive
8 matches
Mail list logo
