> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Brazhnik<brazhnik_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> I found a wrong behavior of tortoiseSVN blame command in some my files.
>>
>> Further investigation has shown that it seems the problem in 'svn
>> blame -g' command.
>>
>> The same problem is in some files of svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk.
>> For example in subversion/svn/main.c
>>
>> Steps for reproduce:
>>
>> 0. svn version is 1.5.5 (windows XP pro / Vista home prem)
>>
>> 1. execute
>> svn blame -r 35734
>> http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/subversion/svn/main.c>main.b
>>
>> 2. execute
>> svn blame -g -r 35734
>> http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/subversion/svn/main.c>main.b-g
>>
>> 3. see line 327 of main.b: last changes in commit 18522. ('svn diff'
>> confirmed this)
>> see line 327 of main.b-g: last changes in commit 1 !!!
>>
>> 4. see line 937 of main.b: last changes in commit 31487.
>> see line 937 of main.b-g: last changes in commit 31715!!! how can
>> original (from merge info) commit number may be greater than direct
>> commit number?
>>
I'm not sure if the issue you're seeing in the svn repository is a bug
in 'svn blame' or rather a problem with the mergeinfo in our repo.
If you take a revision before r33229 instead of HEAD:
$ svn blame -g -r 33228
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/subversion/svn/main.c
... the output is alright.
lgo_at_lgo-laptop:~/dev/trunk$ svn diff -c 33229 -N
..
Property changes on: .
___________________________________________________________________
Modified: svn:mergeinfo
Reverse-merged /trunk:r1-28216
Merged /branches/file-externals:r31705-33228
I don't think that 'Reversed-merged' line is correct, but don't know
enough of the merge-tracking internals to be sure.
Lieven
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1808372
Received on 2009-04-19 17:19:01 CEST