Re: Working copy is not up-to-date. Error?

andreas.koenig@anima.de (Andreas J. Koenig) writes:
> So if you wouldn't mind to extend on that, I'd like to know why my svn
> update was so silent. My update command only said:
>
> % svn up
> At revision 1.
> %

It means the update had no textual or property content to apply to
your working copy. All it did was "bump" the working revisions in
your tree. In other words, in terms of content, your working copy
*was* up to date -- but there's no way the client could have known
that without asking the server for a tree-delta against HEAD. So even
though the server sends back an empty tree-delta, the client now knows
that the entire working copy can be marked as being at HEAD.

> After that I could commit. Shouldn't the update command say something
> like
>
> % svn up
> G .
> At revision 1.

The G implies that some kind of property change was applied to your
directory, and it wasn't.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Nov 24 16:21:29 2002