Philip Martin wrote:
>Ross Mark <rossm@controllingedge.com.au> writes:
>
>
>
>>- SVN_ERR (svn_client__checkout_internal (NULL, new_item->url, path,
>>- &(new_item->revision),
>>- &(new_item->revision),
>>- TRUE, /* recurse */
>>- ib->timestamp_sleep,
>>- ib->ctx, ib->pool));
>>+ /* Try doing a switch first */
>>+ err = svn_client_switch (NULL,
>>+ path,
>>+ new_item->url,
>>+ &(new_item->revision),
>>+ TRUE,
>>+ ib->ctx,
>>+ ib->pool);
>>
>>
>
>Notice that while __checkout_internal() is used instead of _checkout()
>the new code uses _switch() directly. That means that there will be a
>svn_sleep_for_timestamps() for each external, and one of the reasons
>__checkout_internal() was created was to avoid exactly that problem.
>It looks like a __switch_internal() is needed.
>
>
>
I was just about to submit a new patch that uses the subpool and avoids
the locking problems, good thing those regression tests take awhile to
run. Is it worth submitting the patch as is knowing there will be an
extra delay or should I include in the patch your suggested change for
svn_client__switch_internal?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jan 5 00:25:24 2005