Paul T. Burba wrote:
> Author: pburba
> Date: Thu Nov 12 18:37:57 2009
> New Revision: 40493
[...]
> Modified: trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_base/lock.c
> URL: http://svn.collab.net/viewvc/svn/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_base/lock.c?pathrev=40493&r1=40492&r2=40493
> ==============================================================================
> --- trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_base/lock.c Thu Nov 12 15:37:51 2009 (r40492)
> +++ trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_base/lock.c Thu Nov 12 18:37:57 2009 (r40493)
> @@ -98,9 +98,18 @@ txn_body_lock(void *baton, trail_t *trai
> /* While our locking implementation easily supports the locking of
> nonexistent paths, we deliberately choose not to allow such madness. */
> if (kind == svn_node_none)
> - return svn_error_createf(SVN_ERR_FS_NOT_FOUND, NULL,
> - "Path '%s' doesn't exist in HEAD revision",
> - args->path);
> + {
> + if (SVN_IS_VALID_REVNUM(args->current_rev))
> + return svn_error_createf(
> + SVN_ERR_FS_OUT_OF_DATE, NULL,
> + _("Path '%s' doesn't exist in HEAD revision"),
> + args->path);
> + else
> + return svn_error_createf(
> + SVN_ERR_FS_NOT_FOUND, NULL,
> + _("Path '%s' doesn't exist in HEAD revision"),
> + args->path);
> + }
Did you intend to leave both error messages the same even though the error
*codes* differ? That seems non-normal, but perhaps has good reasoning in
this case that I can't detect from the provided context?
--
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2417435
Received on 2009-11-13 07:59:58 CET