Re: [PATCH] Revert and svn:needs-lock

"D.J. Heap" <dj@shadyvale.net> writes:

> Is this better? I guess just looking at entry->lock_token to see if
> they have the lock is sufficient since anything more would require
> contacting the repo, wouldn't it?

Correct, revert should not contact the repository.

> --- subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_ops.c (revision 14458)
> +++ subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_ops.c (working copy)
> @@ -1382,6 +1382,10 @@
> }
> }
>
> + /* If necessary, tweak the read-only-ness of the file. */
> + if (! entry->lock_token)
> + SVN_ERR (svn_wc__maybe_set_read_only (NULL, fullpath, adm_access, pool));
> +

I think svn_wc__maybe_set_read_only can change the timestamp (if it
does a copy-move-delete) but you have put it just after the code that
records the timestamp, that's not good. I wonder if any of the other
uses of svn_wc__maybe_set_read_only have the same problem?

-- 
Philip Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org