[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: FSFS failing regression tests?

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2005-08-03 17:32:56 CEST

Eric Gillespie <epg@pretzelnet.org> writes:

> "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato@collab.net> writes:
> > > FAIL: lt-fs-test 17: merging commit
> >
> > And this one appears to be some sort of strange philosophical
> > disconnect between FSFS and BDB. The situation is the merge() case "E
> > exists neither in SOURCE nor in TARGET". In the BDB code, this
> > so-called "double delete" is allowed -- the code simply doesn't credit
> > the second deleter with the deletion. The FSFS code, however, flags a
> > conflict.
> We intentionally changed this in r13222. This change was meant
> to be back-ported to bdb, but I don't think anyone has been
> interested enough to do it.

Ah, so this is the first visible fallout (that I can recall) of the
merge algorithm rewrite -- svn_fs_merge() lost the ability to merge an
obviously reconcilable situation. As you state, there's no promise in
the API that says what kinds of auto-merging will and won't be done,
so we're not strictly breaking contract. Just means svn_fs_merge()
isn't nearly as useful as it could be.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Aug 3 17:36:10 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.