Re: How to build an expected_status to check against unversioned items?

"Rui, Guo" <timmyguo_at_mail.ustc.edu.cn> writes:
> I'm writing a test cases for the situation of folding sub-trees that
> contain unversioned/modified items. I'm wondering which flag to use
> when constructing the expected_status (a.k.a. the status_tree). A '? '
> does not work because the command line (svn st -v -u -q) used to
> generate actual status tree in the test framework will not include
> unversioned items at all. Should I exclude unversioned items from the
> status_tree and rely on the disk_tree to check against them? Does this
> way accurate enough?

Sure. I mean, if you're worried that status *without* -q might still
fail to show them, you can test that explicitly, but I'm not sure it's
really necessary to test for that anyway.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-04-17 19:09:09 CEST