Stefano Spinucci wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm Stefano Spinucci, and the issue 2101 was opened
> after a message I sent on @dev list
> (http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2004-10/1018.shtml).
>
> Months passed, the issue was marked as resolved, I
> upgraded today svn to 1.1.4 (on windows 2000), I
> messed a bit with my repo and i discovered that... the
> issue was not (completely) resolved.
>
> To let the error show, simply add two lines to the
> reproduction recipe (taken from the issue 2101):
>
> svnadmin create repo
> svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc
> svn mkdir wc/foo
> touch wc/foo/bar
> svn add wc/foo/bar
> svn ci -m "" wc
> svn rm wc/foo/bar
> svn ci -m "" wc
> svn cp wc/foo wc/foo2
> svn ci -m "" wc
>
> ** added actions (on windows 2000) **
> del wc/foo2
> svn up
>
>
> And only now the deleted file (bar) 'll reappear in
> foo2.
I *think* that this behaviour is expected. It's
because yo haven't done an "svn up" in between each
commit, so the resvision of wc/foo hasn't been updated
since you first created wc/foo/bar.
Let's annotate your recipe:
> svnadmin create repo
> svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc
> svn mkdir wc/foo
> touch wc/foo/bar
> svn add wc/foo/bar
> svn ci -m "" wc [wc, wc/foo and wc/bar are @ r1]
> svn rm wc/foo/bar
> svn ci -m "" wc [wc, wc/foo are still @ r1]
> svn cp wc/foo wc/foo2 [you copy wc/foo@r1 to wc/foo2]
> svn ci -m "" wc
So you're copying wc/foo@r1 to wc/foo2, creating r3. wc/foo@r1
still contained wc/foo/bar.
Although the behaviour is maybe not what you're expecting,
it's explainable. You could correct this by doing an "svn up"
between each commit.
daniel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun May 15 00:35:59 2005