In the FS layer, really only the root of a copied tree is copied and all
its children area unchanged. In higher layers there are also wrappers
that return TRUE for any path under a copy, not just for a copy
operation's root.
And next time, ask your question in more words.
Markus Schaber wrote on
I have been having problems updating and installing new software in Eclipse,
and the problem appears to be related to svn. It seems that I can duplicate
the problems using svn info as shown in text below. I am running the latest
version of Snow Leopard on a MacBook Pro. I received the 405 err
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 7:18 AM, David Aldrich
>>> wrote:
>>>
> > I think there was mention on the developers list o
Johan,
I've seen this referenced wherever the issue arises. Pasting what I assume
is the portion that is of interest:
*Is Subversion a Day Early?
If you specify a single date as a revision without specifying a time of day
(for example 2006-11-27), you may think that Subversion should give you th
Johan,
I've seen this referenced wherever the issue arises. Pasting what I assume
is the portion that is of interest:
Is Subversion a Day Early?
If you specify a single date as a revision without specifying a time of day
(for example 2006-11-27), you may think that Subversion should give you
Yes, what you describe is indeed how it works. It's not a bug. See:
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.tour.revs.specifiers.html#svn.tour.revs.dates
for some more information (more specifically in the section "Is
Subversion a Day Early?")
Cheers,
Johan
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 2:05
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 7:18 AM, David Aldrich
>> wrote:
>>
> I think there was mention on the developers list of releasing
> Subversion 1.6.17. I am interested in the im
I just ran into (at least one variation of) this phenomena and believe I know
what's going on.
When a date range is used, the first thing that svn does is decide which
revision to start the log from. It does this by taking a snapshot of the
HEAD revision AT THE START TIME specified. Not the first
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 7:20 AM, Michael Diers wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 2011-04-21 13:58, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 5:15 AM, Ian Wild wrote:
>>
>>> That sounds like a good translation to me. The maths gets complicated to put
>>> it
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 02:31 -0500, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> On Apr 15, 2011, at 01:06, Tony Butt wrote:
>
> > On a particular piece of code, the svn diff header claims 33 old lines,
> > when there are actually 32.
> >
> > I have re-run this with an external diff command
> > (svn diff -r 57968:57
David Brodbeck wrote on 04/26/2011 06:07:13 PM:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Alan M. Evans
wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 17:18 -0500, kmra...@rockwellcollins.com wrote:
> > "Alan M. Evans" wrote on 04/26/2011 04:54:37 PM:
> > >
> > > > I've found using "*" to be non intuitive. Try:
> > >
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Alan M. Evans wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 17:18 -0500, kmra...@rockwellcollins.com wrote:
> > "Alan M. Evans" wrote on 04/26/2011 04:54:37 PM:
> > >
> > > > I've found using "*" to be non intuitive. Try:
> > > >
> > > > [/]
> > > > $authenticated=rw
> > > > jo
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 17:18 -0500, kmra...@rockwellcollins.com wrote:
> "Alan M. Evans" wrote on 04/26/2011 04:54:37 PM:
> >
> > > I've found using "*" to be non intuitive. Try:
> > >
> > > [/]
> > > $authenticated=rw
> > > jon=
> >
> > Thanks for the reply! Unfortunately, jon still has ful
"Alan M. Evans" wrote on 04/26/2011 04:54:37 PM:
>
> > I've found using "*" to be non intuitive. Try:
> >
> > [/]
> > $authenticated=rw
> > jon=
>
> Thanks for the reply! Unfortunately, jon still has full access...
Does order matter? I think the first match wins:
[/]
jon=
$authenticat
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 16:45 -0500, kmra...@rockwellcollins.com wrote:
> I've found using "*" to be non intuitive. Try:
>
> [/]
> $authenticated=rw
> jon=
Thanks for the reply! Unfortunately, jon still has full access...
-Alan
"Alan M. Evans" wrote on 04/26/2011 04:26:27 PM:
> Sorry for what must be a simple question; I've googled around and
> read/followed all the examples and docs I can find. There is apparently
> something fundamental that I'm misunderstanding.
>
> Server is running CentOS 5, Subversion 1.6.15, Apac
Sorry for what must be a simple question; I've googled around and
read/followed all the examples and docs I can find. There is apparently
something fundamental that I'm misunderstanding.
Server is running CentOS 5, Subversion 1.6.15, Apache 2.2.3.
We have a company-wide repository that all develo
Johan Corveleyn wrote on Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 21:36:41 +0200:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Daniel Shahaf
> wrote:
> > I don't know what releases the bug may be in --- I use
> > a case-insensitive filesystem.
>
> Heh. I'm certainly not missing the absence of a negation here. Or:
> there's o
And what about the system-wide file then? /etc/subversion/servers?
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Platz, Steve wrote:
> For those Linux servers that I've tried this on, the ~/.subversion/servers
> file is the default one that is created with a brand new install. There are
> no entries under [
For those Linux servers that I've tried this on, the ~/.subversion/servers file
is the default one that is created with a brand new install. There are no
entries under [global] or [groups].
-Original Message-
From: Johan Corveleyn [mailto:jcor...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Platz, Steve wrote:
> Our Entrust SSL certificate recently expired and was replaced with a new one
> utilizing a certificate chain. Since installing the new certificate, access
> to a front-end website using this same certificate has been unaffected.
> However, we
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> I don't know what releases the bug may be in --- I use
> a case-insensitive filesystem.
Heh. I'm certainly not missing the absence of a negation here. Or:
there's one too many, isn't there?
--
Johan
Andy Levy wrote on Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 13:58:08 -0400:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 06:47, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Andy Levy wrote on Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 06:26:47 -0400:
> >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:04, Daniel Shahaf
> >> wrote:
> >> > Andy Levy wrote on Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:56:14 -0400:
>
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 06:47, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Andy Levy wrote on Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 06:26:47 -0400:
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:04, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> > Andy Levy wrote on Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:56:14 -0400:
>> >> But our authz file is written as [Code:/path] and when committing
On 4/26/2011 9:47 AM, Jonatan Soto wrote:
Subversion 1.3
tree conflicts.
Wait, what? Tree conflicts weren't introduced until svn 1.6. Something
strange is going on here if you think you're using 1.3 but you're
getting reports of tree conflicts.
(And yes, as you suspected the real solution i
On Apr 26, 2011, at 11:47, Jonatan Soto wrote:
> We are facing some problems during a merge process from a branch to trunk (2
> URL merge). Note that we didn't synch the branch with the trunk at any time.
> We want apply all changes made in that branch back to the trunk but for some
> reason t
Hi all,
We are facing some problems during a merge process from a branch to trunk (2
URL merge). Note that we didn't synch the branch with the trunk at any time.
We want apply all changes made in that branch back to the trunk but for some
reason the results that are we getting are very odd. Lots
Our Entrust SSL certificate recently expired and was replaced with a new one
utilizing a certificate chain. Since installing the new certificate, access to
a front-end website using this same certificate has been unaffected. However,
we're now seeing issues when we attempt to check out/update/b
Hi,
Why is copyfrom_url not set in subdirectories of copied directories?
I don't want to complain, but only want a rationale.
Thanks!
Best regards
Markus Schaber
___
We software Automation.
3S-Smart Software Solutions GmbH
Markus Schaber | Developer
Memmi
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 7:18 AM, David Aldrich
> wrote:
>
>>> > I think there was mention on the developers list of releasing
>>> > Subversion 1.6.17. I am interested in the improvements to Windows
>>> > checkout.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Are you talk
> Often I have small changes that apply to a branch and the trunk
> alike. Of
> course I cannot do a normal merge because the local change doesn't
> have a
> revision number yet.
>
> If I copy the change from the branch to the trunk or vice versa and
> then
> commit it in one single commit, will i
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 7:18 AM, David Aldrich
wrote:
>> > I think there was mention on the developers list of releasing
>> > Subversion 1.6.17. I am interested in the improvements to Windows
>> > checkout.
>> >
>>
>> Are you talking about version 1.6.17 or version 1.7.x? I haven't seen
>> anyt
> -Original Message-
> From: Andreas Tscharner [mailto:andreas.tschar...@metromec.ch]
> Sent: 26 April 2011 12:17
> To: David Aldrich; users@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Subversion 1.6.17?
>
> > I think there was mention on the developers list of releasing
> > Subversion 1.6.17. I
> I think there was mention on the developers list of releasing
> Subversion 1.6.17. I am interested in the improvements to
> Windows checkout.
>
Are you talking about version 1.6.17 or version 1.7.x? I haven't seen anything
about 1.6.17 here on the list, but there have been a few references on
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name]
> Sent: 26 April 2011 11:48
> To: Andy Levy
> Cc: Bob Archer; Michael Hüttermann; users@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: repo on Windows -- why not?
>
> Andy Levy wrote on Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 06:26:47 -0400:
Andy Levy wrote on Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 06:26:47 -0400:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:04, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Andy Levy wrote on Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:56:14 -0400:
> >> But our authz file is written as [Code:/path] and when committing, we
> >> get 403 Forbidden errors because no rules match
David Aldrich wrote on Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:22:14 +0100:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Andy Levy [mailto:andy.l...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 26 April 2011 11:13
> > To: David Aldrich
> > Cc: 'users@subversion.apache.org' (users@subversion.apache.org)
> > Subject: Re: Subversion 1.6.17?
> >
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 06:22, David Aldrich wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Andy Levy [mailto:andy.l...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 26 April 2011 11:13
>> To: David Aldrich
>> Cc: 'users@subversion.apache.org' (users@subversion.apache.org)
>> Subject: Re: Subversion 1.6.17?
>>
>> On Tue, Ap
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:04, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Andy Levy wrote on Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:56:14 -0400:
>> But our authz file is written as [Code:/path] and when committing, we
>> get 403 Forbidden errors because no rules match - the user is
>> committing to code and the rule checks for Code
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Levy [mailto:andy.l...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 26 April 2011 11:13
> To: David Aldrich
> Cc: 'users@subversion.apache.org' (users@subversion.apache.org)
> Subject: Re: Subversion 1.6.17?
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 03:53, David Aldrich
> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> >
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 03:53, David Aldrich wrote:
> Hi
>
>
>
> I think there was mention on the developers list of releasing Subversion
> 1.6.17. I am interested in the improvements to Windows checkout.
>
>
>
> Any news on this please?
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/branches/1.6.x
Hi
I think there was mention on the developers list of releasing Subversion
1.6.17. I am interested in the improvements to Windows checkout.
Any news on this please?
Best regards
David
> > Often I have small changes that apply to a branch and the trunk alike.
> > Of course I cannot do a normal merge because the local change doesn't
> > have a revision number yet.
> >
> > If I copy the change from the branch to the trunk or vice versa and
> > then commit it in one single commit, w
Hi,
André Hänsel wrote:
>
> Often I have small changes that apply to a branch and the trunk alike. Of
> course I cannot do a normal merge because the local change doesn't have a
> revision number yet.
>
> If I copy the change from the branch to the trunk or vice versa and then
> commit it in o
Often I have small changes that apply to a branch and the trunk alike. Of
course I cannot do a normal merge because the local change doesn't have a
revision number yet.
If I copy the change from the branch to the trunk or vice versa and then
commit it in one single commit, will it break merge trac
Yeah sure. I hope, I will get you back.
Thank you very much for the info.
Sorry for late reply, I was on vacation.
Ian Wild-2 wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ryan Schmidt <
> subversion-20...@ryandesign.com> wrote:
>
>
> For full multiple-master capability, you'll have to look e
46 matches
Mail list logo
