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

Re: fixing issue 679

From: <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2002-04-29 18:03:04 CEST

Philip Martin <philip@codematters.co.uk> writes:

> Hello
> I added some comments to issue 679 but although they appear on the
> issue they don't appear to have made it to the mailing list, nor to
> the mailing list web archive :-( I'll post them here:
> Looking at libsvn_client/commit_util.c:226 harvest_commitables() there
> seems to be some code to handle this, but it's disabled.
> /* Check for the copied-subtree addition case. */
> if ((entry->copied || copy_mode)
> && (entry->schedule == svn_wc_schedule_normal))
> {
> #if 0 /* ### todo: Find a better way to do this that doesn't require
> reading the parent's entry. */
> svn_revnum_t p_rev = entry->revision - 1; /* arbitrary non-equal
> value */
> svn_boolean_t wc_root = FALSE;
> Is reading the parent's entry bad? Is it bad enough to warrant making
> 'svn cp wc_dir wc_dir' break? Or is this code disabled by mistake?
> Is reading the parent's entry bad simply from an efficiency point of
> view? If that is the case I think adding an svn_entry_t *parent to
> the function would be quite straight-forward.

Comments made on the issues go only to the reporter of, and owner of,
the issue, I believe. So I received the mails for those comments.

Your diagnosis of the problem is accurate. The code is commented out
because it is inefficient to read the parent's entry (again) here.
Passing in a pointer to the parent's entry is just what I had planned
to do, but hadn't gotten around to it. I'm making the necessary mods

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Apr 29 18:07:15 2002

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.