On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 09:36:07AM -0600, Shaw Terwilliger wrote:
> Let me first say that I really like the notion of Subversion soon replacing
> CVS in most or all of its installations. I think the internal design is
> simple and neat, and the team has done a good job focussing on the features
> important to developers.
> I've been building the svn trees for the last few weeks, and I'm trying to
> determine whether the behavior I'm seeing is intended (and I just haven't
> found the documentation to let me know).
> I check out any tree with the -d option, and supply a name other than
> the repository's last component, and svn gets confused when I later do things
> like "svn update" inside that tree. The client can't seem to map its
> not-quite-maching-the-repository working copy directory name with the file
> info inside it.
Could you give some more details. I always check out the subversion
source tree like this:
svn co http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk -d svn.static (or svn.shared,
and I have never noticed any problems.
> Shaw Terwilliger <email@example.com>
> SourceGear Corporation
> 217.356.0105 x 641
Kevin Pilch-Bisson http://www.pilch-bisson.net
"Historically speaking, the presences of wheels in Unix
has never precluded their reinvention." - Larry Wall
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:50 2006
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored