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

Re: [PATCH] (alternate fix for issue 900)

From: mark benedetto king <bking_at_inquira.com>
Date: 2002-09-15 19:00:07 CEST

On Sun, Sep 15, 2002 at 05:32:09PM +0100, Philip Martin wrote:
> mark benedetto king <bking@Inquira.Com> writes:
>
> > On Sat, Sep 14, 2002 at 11:02:37AM +0100, Philip Martin wrote:
> > > svn_repos_open doesn't distinguish between a missing format file and a
> > > format file it cannot read, both cause the function to return
> > > SVN_ERR_REPOS_UNSUPPORTED_VERSION. svn_ra_local__split_URL wants to
> > > distinguish between these two cases. It may be better to change
> > > svn_repos_open, document the behaviour, and then use that in
> > > svn_ra_local__split_URL.
> > >
> >
> > Let's say we want to (break the API and) modify svn_repos_open to
> > look like:
>
> Breaking the API is not really a problem at the moment. However I
> really meant changing svn_repos_open so that it returned more useful
> errors. I think the reason it returns REPOS_UNSUPPORTED_VERSION in
> the case where there is no format file is so that it can support old
> repositories which didn't have such a file. I was questioning whether
> this was the best thing to do. It may be better if it simply passed
> through the ENOENT error from APR, or perhaps returned some sort of
> NO_REPOS error.
>

What I'm getting at is that svn_repos_open can't tell when
to return that error, either, without peeking inside the
error in *exactly the same way* that we're describing as
inappriate for svn_ra_local__split_URL to do.

Am I missing something?

--ben

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Sep 15 19:07:19 2002

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