Around about 03/02/11 17:01, Stefan Sperling typed ...
* subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
svn_io_open_unique_file3: don't call svn_io_open_uniquely_named(),
but instead use a copy of that routine
Which routine, precisely?
svn_io_open_uniquely_named(); sorry, I thought that was clear enough.
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 15:59, Dongsheng Song wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 01:19, Greg Hudson wrote:
>> On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 10:31 -0500, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>> Sounds reasonable.
>>>
>>> What changes to the source code would be required?
>>>
>>> Do we just change
>>> N_("three\n\npar
On 04.02.2011 09:08, Neil Bird wrote:
Around about 03/02/11 17:01, Stefan Sperling typed ...
* subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
svn_io_open_unique_file3: don't call svn_io_open_uniquely_named(),
but instead use a copy of that routine
Which routine, precisely?
svn_io_open_uniquely_named(); so
Around about 04/02/11 10:52, Stefan Fuhrmann typed ...
I'll give it another bash, though , if you think it's worth it.
Definitely. It contains quite a number of file access
optimizations that should become best visible on
"high overhead" FS like NTFS.
It's turning out to be the PITA I expec
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Johan Corveleyn wrote on Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 02:47:50 +0100:
>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Daniel Shahaf
>> wrote:
>> > Johan Corveleyn wrote on Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 14:04:07 +0100:
>> >> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Daniel Shahaf
Around about 04/02/11 12:06, Neil Bird typed ...
It's turning out to be the PITA I expected.
OK, I've backported enough of the trunk copy to get it compiling for
Linux, but it now fails 2 tests. I'll investigate next week. It almost
certainly won't compile for Windows, either, as there's
Reviewing my own commits...
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 9:20 AM, wrote:
> Author: hwright
> Date: Fri Feb 4 15:20:50 2011
> New Revision: 1067195
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1067195&view=rev
> Log:
> Allow callers of svn_checksum_mismatch_err() to specify the first bit of their
> error
"noorul Islam. Kamal Malmiyoda" writes:
> On Feb 3, 2011, at 5:39 AM, "Hyrum K Wright" wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 6:29 AM, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
>>>
>>> Is ignored_prop_mods list functionality completely implemented?
>>
>> Not yet. I've got all the boiler-plate done, but have not y
We currently mark tests XFail (or Skip, or something else) by wrapping
them in the test_list in the test suite. Rather than doing it there,
I think it makes more sense to use Python's decorator syntax to mark
tests as XFail right at their definition, rather than down in the test
list. Keeping all
On Feb 4, 2011, at 6:57 AM, hwri...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: hwright
> Date: Fri Feb 4 14:57:14 2011
> New Revision: 1067186
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1067186&view=rev
> Log:
> Introduce a new helper function which compares two checksums and then returns
> the appropriate err
On Feb 4, 2011, at 9:15 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> We currently mark tests XFail (or Skip, or something else) by wrapping
> them in the test_list in the test suite. Rather than doing it there,
> I think it makes more sense to use Python's decorator syntax to mark
> tests as XFail right at their
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:15, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>...
> We currently mark tests XFail (or Skip, or something else) by wrapping
> them in the test_list in the test suite. Rather than doing it there,
> I think it makes more sense to use Python's decorator syntax to mark
> tests as XFail right at
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
>
> On Feb 4, 2011, at 9:15 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>
>> We currently mark tests XFail (or Skip, or something else) by wrapping
>> them in the test_list in the test suite. Rather than doing it there,
>> I think it makes more sense to use Python
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 4, 2011, at 9:15 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>>
>>> We currently mark tests XFail (or Skip, or something else) by wrapping
>>> them in the test_list in the test suite. Rather tha
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
>>>
>>> On Feb 4, 2011, at 9:15 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>>>
We currently mark tests XFail (or Skip, or something else) by wrappin
On 02/04/2011 02:09 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:15, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> ...
>> We currently mark tests XFail (or Skip, or something else) by wrapping
>> them in the test_list in the test suite. Rather than doing it there,
>> I think it makes more sense to use Python's d
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:54 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 02/04/2011 02:09 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:15, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>>> ...
>>> We currently mark tests XFail (or Skip, or something else) by wrapping
>>> them in the test_list in the test suite. Rather than
Neil Bird wrote:
> Around about 04/02/11 10:52, Stefan Fuhrmann typed ...
> >> I'll give it another bash, though , if you think it's worth it.
> >>
> > Definitely. It contains quite a number of file access
> > optimizations that should become best visible on
> > "high overhead" FS like NTFS.
>
>
Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> > - SVN_ERR(svn_checksum_mismatch_err(svn_dirent_local_style(fb->path, pool),
> > -text_checksum, actual_checksum, pool));
> > + SVN_ERR(svn_checksum_mismatch_err(text_checksum, actual_checksum, pool,
> > +
Hyrum K Wright hyrumwright.org> writes:
>
> [[[
>
> Index: subversion/tests/cmdline/svntest/testcase.py
> ===
> --- subversion/tests/cmdline/svntest/testcase.py (revision 1067239)
> +++ subversion/tests/cmdline/svntest/testcase
Hi, I want to backport "FSFS Packing of revision property shards"
feature to my private subversion-1.6.x branch
Anyone can help me to find out where is the patch?
I know it has a issue #3444
"http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3444";, but I do
not the related revision.
Daniel Shahaf writes:
> Noorul Islam K M wrote on Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 14:15:48 +0530:
>
>>
>> Attached is the patch to fix issue #3792. Please review and let me know
>> your comments.
>>
>> Log
>> [[[
>>
>> Fix for issue #3792. Make svn info to display information for
>> excluded items.
>>
>
22 matches
Mail list logo
