On Thu, 08 Feb 2007, Peter Lundblad wrote:
> > The log message seems to be missing most of the changes to libsvn_*/.
> > While most of them are just 'update callers', I would have thought you'd
> > mention the change in libsvn_wc/adm_files.c where the key part of this
> > change was made.
> Of course. I accidentally removed two lines too much from the original
> log message;) Fixed.
I still have this change (and complete change log message) sitting in my WC
at the office, but I fell sick, and haven't been in to commit it since
discussion with eh completed.
Thanks for committing it, Peter.
> > More importantly, though, I'm not sure that the API change to
> > svn_io_remove_dir() is appropriate. Is there any reason that the single
> > caller who wishes to ignore ENOENT can't simply ignore that error?
> The difference is that the new function let's make sure that the directory
> actually doesn't exist afterwards. In general, we could have an ENOENT
> further down in the tree and in that case, ignoring the error would leave
> a half-removed directory. I think this behaviour can be more generally useful
> in cleanup actions, hence the new API.
I noted the same thing while reviewing this patch; the new API is more generally
useful, so worth the change.
Received on Thu Feb 8 18:13:30 2007
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored