Brian Denny <brian@briandenny.net> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 05:10:54PM -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> > Brian Denny <brian@briandenny.net> writes:
> [snip]
> > > so, if i am thinking straight:
> > >
> > > after a successful update, there should be no "missing" items and
> > > no "deleted" items -- for every entry, a file or directory should
> > > exist. therefore, in [wherever the post-update processing you refer
> > > to above happens], we can delete *any* entry whose corresponding
> > > file or directory does not exist on disk, whether or not it is marked
> > > 'deleted'.
> >
> > Sounds right to me! Assuming we reported the wc state correctly, we
> > have to trust the server... trust that it has accounted for all
> > deltas. Any "stragglers", such as missing or 'deleted' items, need to
> > be cleaned up.
> >
>
> so, this seems to work beautifully, except for one thing:
> the removal of 'deleted' entries occurs within the recursive helpers of
> svn_wc__do_update_cleanup, which doesn't have a notifier and so can't
> print the line
>
> D myfile
>
> as i think should happen for 'missing' case. so the cleaning up of
> 'missing' items will probably have to happen someplace else -- i'm
> thinking svn_wc_crawl_revisions...
Sure, whatever's easier. It may not be so hard to pass a ctx object
into the update_cleanup helpers either.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Apr 27 16:29:20 2003