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

Re: neon 0.26.1

From: Artem Egorkine <arteme_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2006-08-20 10:14:26 CEST

On 8/20/06, Peter Samuelson <peter@p12n.org> wrote:
> [Troy Curtis Jr]
> > I run gentoo so it was easy enough to roll back to
> > 0.25.5, but it seems to me it should be a >=0.25.5 kind of check.
> The reason it's called 0.26 rather than 0.25.6 or 0.25.7 is because the
> developers have made some incompatible changes. Historically,
> subversion has had to be adapted to each new major release of neon, and
> in fact the library has caused enough trouble that minor releases are
> manually approved as well.
> > Also note that the subversion 1.3.2 ebuild for gentoo actually
> > requires me to install 0.26.1 (0.25.5 is marked unstable for some
> > reason), and it has been working fine.
> I've been told that subversion will compile against neon 0.26 (if you
> update the configure-time checks, as the gentoo ebuild does) but it
> won't quite run properly. I haven't verified this. Do you use
> subversion with http:// and https:// URLs? If not, you aren't testing
> the neon code paths. (:

I have been using subversion-1.3.2 with neon-0.26.1 [on gentoo] to
access DAV repositories and never had any problems with it yet. Your
milage may, however, vary. After all, as Peter pointed out, there
probably IS a reason they require exactly 0.25.5...

On the other hand, I couldn't find any reason in Gentoo's Bugzilla or
otherwise for 0.25.5 to be masked in Portage...


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Aug 20 10:14:59 2006

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.