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

Re: 1.6.11 tarballs up for testing/signing

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 10:35:53 -0400

Paul Burba wrote:
> Anyhow, the test failed for Stefan because the --dry-run output was different:
>
> The dry-run merge output:
> --- Merging r5 through r9 into
> 'svn-test-work/working_copies/merge_tests-63.files':
> C svn-test-work/working_copies/merge_tests-63.files/B
> --- Merging r5 through r9 into
> 'svn-test-work/working_copies/merge_tests-63.files/mu':
> U svn-test-work/working_copies/merge_tests-63.files/mu
> --- Merging r5 through r9 into
> 'svn-test-work/working_copies/merge_tests-63.files':
> C svn-test-work/working_copies/merge_tests-63.files/D
> U svn-test-work/working_copies/merge_tests-63.files
> Summary of conflicts:
> Tree conflicts: 2
>
> It's different yes, but merge_tests-63.files/mu,
> merge_tests-63.files/B, and merge_tests-63.files/D are just notified
> in a different order, there is nothing wrong with that that I can see,
> they are all at the same depth.

What had me concerned about this output was the header lines:

--- Merging r5 through r9 into
'svn-test-work/working_copies/merge_tests-63.files':
--- Merging r5 through r9 into
'svn-test-work/working_copies/merge_tests-63.files/mu':
--- Merging r5 through r9 into
'svn-test-work/working_copies/merge_tests-63.files':

"What? Merging r5-r9 to the root of the working copy twice?"

But maybe I'm putting too much stock into what those headers are actually
saying about the real work going on underneath.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

Received on 2010-04-19 16:36:28 CEST

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