[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Handle WC local reverts which have modified our merge info

From: Paul Burba <pburba_at_collab.net>
Date: 2007-05-30 15:51:58 CEST

Yesterday in IRC:

<dlr> pburba: While you're at it, I think we can get rid of those
"handle WC local reverts which have modified our merge info" comments in
merge.c
<dlr> I *think*

Here is the code in question, in
merge.c:do_merge()/do_single_file_merge():

      /* When only recording merge info, we don't perform an actual
         merge for the specified range. */
      if (merge_b->record_only)
        {
          if (merge_b->dry_run)
            {
              return SVN_NO_ERROR;
            }
          else
            {
              /* ### Handle WC-local reverts which have modified our
merge
                 ### info. */
              apr_hash_t *merges;
              SVN_ERR(determine_merges_performed(&merges, target_wcpath,
                                                 &range, &notify_b,
pool));

              /* If merge target has indirect mergeinfo set it. */
              if (indirect)
                SVN_ERR(svn_client__record_wc_mergeinfo(target_wcpath,
 
target_mergeinfo,
                                                        adm_access,
pool));

              return update_wc_mergeinfo(target_wcpath, entry, rel_path,
                                         merges, is_revert, adm_access,
                                         ctx, pool);
            }
        }

Dan,

I'm not 100% sure exactly what these comments refer to. In the case
where pre-existing local changes reverted *some* of the mergeinfo on
TARGET_WCPATH, then trunk currently works correctly.

But if pre-existing local changes reverted *all* of the mergeinfo on
TARGET_WCPATH and TARGET_WCPATH has no WC ancestor to inherit mergeinfo
from, then merge, --record-only or not, doesn't work. But AFAICT this
is a different problem altogether (i.e. we don't allow empty revision
ranges to be set) and not something specific to --record-only. It just
looks like this problem in fact:

http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2007-05/0592.shtml

I removed the comments in r25203 as I'm pretty sure this is a separate
issue, but if I'm off base in my understanding let me know. Also, if
you have a moment to look at the above thread that would be great.

Thanks,

Paul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed May 30 15:52:37 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.