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

Re: Minor feature request: --dry-run for update

From: Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:43:13 +0200

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 19:09, Alan Barrett <apb_at_cequrux.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 19, 2009 5:55 PM, "Greg Stein" <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> "svn st --show-updates" is what you're asking for. I really don't
>> understand why that doesn't work.
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, David Glasser wrote:
>> svn st -u only tells what would happen if you ran exactly "svn up";
>> without making the status CLI way uglier than the "svn up --dry-run"
>> proposal, it's not going to tell you what would happen with a more
>> complicated update command (with -r, --depth, etc).
> When "svn status -u" shows that a file has local modifications and
> also has new version in the repository, it doesn't indicate whether
> the local and repository changes would conflict.  "svn merge --dry-run
> -rBASE:HEAD" is much closer to what "svn update --dry-run" should do.

Yes. There were a number of followups that pointed this out.

So yah... a --dry-run can make sense if a more thorough check is needed.


Received on 2009-03-30 20:43:35 CEST

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