Hi Michael,
Thanks for your response. It turns out that my problem was indeed caused by
the WC getting "confused" as to which revision it is at which results when a
commit happens without an update. I take it that this is something inherent
in subversion, so I'll have to work with this.
Thanks a lot for your help.
Regards,
Sukhmeet
On 7/1/05, Michael Sinz <michael.sinz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It is very easy to get confused as to what revision the WC thinks it
> is at and what it "feels" like it is at. That is not to say that the WC
> is incorrect, just that it "feels" wrong due to the behavior of the
> system.
>
> Here is one of the strange results I get that are, to me at least, very
> un-nerving and yet somewhat correct:
>
> For example, I just did this set of commands:
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn up
> At revision 12.
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn status
> M fold.js
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn info .
> Path: .
> URL: https://svn.code-host.net/svn/example/trunk/fold
> Repository UUID: 7e4e2bb8-96f4-0310-a956-93822b521e05
> Revision: 12
> Node Kind: directory
> Schedule: normal
> Last Changed Author: mks
> Last Changed Rev: 7
> Last Changed Date: 2005-04-18 21:13:56 -0400 (Mon, 18 Apr 2005)
>
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn commit -m 'Test commit'
> Sending fold/fold.js
> Transmitting file data .
> Committed revision 13.
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn status
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn info .
> Path: .
> URL: https://svn.code-host.net/svn/example/trunk/fold
> Repository UUID: 7e4e2bb8-96f4-0310-a956-93822b521e05
> Revision: 12
> Node Kind: directory
> Schedule: normal
> Last Changed Author: mks
> Last Changed Rev: 7
> Last Changed Date: 2005-04-18 21:13:56 -0400 (Mon, 18 Apr 2005)
>
>
> Note that the svn info still said revision 12 (and cwd 7) even though
> I just committed a file there.
>
> Now, if I do a svn cp at this point and then log:
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn cp .
> https://svn.code-host.net/svn/example/branches/test1-branch
>
> Committed revision 14.
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn log -v --stop-on-copy
> https://svn.code-host.net/svn/example/branches/test1-branch
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r14 | mks | 2005-07-01 22:23:39 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jul 2005) | 2 lines
> Changed paths:
> A /branches/test1-branch (from /trunk/fold:12)
> R /branches/test1-branch/fold.js (from /trunk/fold/fold.js:13)
>
> Test of a cp . without first a up...
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Note how the revision used was 12 but then a R was done on the one
> file that was different (even though it was checked in at 13)
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn up
> At revision 14.
> [1] + Done nedit fold.js
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn info .
> Path: .
> URL: https://svn.code-host.net/svn/example/trunk/fold
> Repository UUID: 7e4e2bb8-96f4-0310-a956-93822b521e05
> Revision: 14
> Node Kind: directory
> Schedule: normal
> Last Changed Author: mks
> Last Changed Rev: 13
> Last Changed Date: 2005-07-01 22:16:22 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jul 2005)
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn cp .
> https://svn.code-host.net/svn/example/branches/test2-branch
>
> Committed revision 15.
>
> mks@localhost:example/fold> svn log -v --stop-on-copy
> https://svn.code-host.net/svn/example/branches/test2-branch
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r15 | mks | 2005-07-01 22:29:51 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jul 2005) | 2 lines
> Changed paths:
> A /branches/test2-branch (from /trunk/fold:14)
>
> Test of a cp . after an up...
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Now, I did this with a directory, but the same happens with
> individual files. So the WC's idea of where you are at is
> very much a factor in how the actual commits are done
> and what they look like.
>
> (BTW - I think it is a bug to have done a commit and yet not
> have the WC correctly reflect that but it is a non-trivial problem
> to address - very non-trivial given the fact that other parts of
> the tree may not be updated or committed to match the new
> revision... So the current behavior, while a bit confusing does
> produce valid results which is the main issue)
>
>
> --
> Michael Sinz Technology and Engineering Director/Consultant
> "Starting Startups" mailto:Michael.Sinz@sinz.org
> My place on the web http://www.sinz.org/Michael.Sinz
>
Received on Tue Jul 5 18:05:37 2005