On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 07:37:31AM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> Two questions here:
> 1. Why did none of the existing functions in libsvn_subr/prompt.c fit
> the use case?
They assume a terminal. I'm not sure if they'd work on stdin as-is.
> 2. What's wrong with using svn_stream_readline() with
>
Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 07:37:31AM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
2. What's wrong with using svn_stream_readline() with
svn_io_stream_for_stdin2()?
In other words: I suspect this new function should be removed.
[...]
This function is in fact just a convenience wrapper arou
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 09:36:42AM +, Julian Foad wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 07:37:31AM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> > > 2. What's wrong with using svn_stream_readline() with
> > > svn_io_stream_for_stdin2()?
> > >
> > > In other words: I suspect this new funct
Philip Martin wrote:
Julian Foad wrote:
Another possible approach is to look for compatibility breakage by
running the 1.9 client and test suite against the 1.10 libraries,
and indeed different client/server version combinations.
I did this recently.
Thank you Philip! Extremely helpful.
If
Julian Foad wrote on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 13:09 +:
> Philip Martin wrote:
> >> Julian Foad wrote:
> >>> Another possible approach is to look for compatibility breakage by
> >>> running the 1.9 client and test suite against the 1.10 libraries,
> >>> and indeed different client/server version combina
5 matches
Mail list logo
