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

Re: svn commit: r937010 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion: include/private/svn_wc_private.h libsvn_client/diff.c libsvn_wc/copy.c libsvn_wc/node.c

From: Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 11:56:25 +0100

Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> writes:

>> Are there any circumstances today when a node will not have an URL but
>> will have a copyfrom URL?  Everything seems to work if I remove the
>> copyfrom stuf from convert_to_url.
> entry->url "does not exist"... today, we call a function to provide a
> URL. That means we can return a URL in every possible situation, for
> some semantic of "what does that URL represent?"
> In general(*), entry->url means "the repository location that the node
> came from, or where it will end up after a commit". And with that
> semantic, we can *almost* always provide an answer.
> The only situation that I can think of is where a switched subdir has
> been rm'd so we get back svn_wc__db_status_obstructed from the wc_db
> functions. If we use the parent's information, we can guess at a URL,
> but (due to the switch) it is wrong. Conceivably, we could *ensure*
> that enough information is left in the parent stub to properly compute
> the URL.
> We can always compute "where will this end up?" regardless of rm'd
> subdirs. Excluded/absent/etc nodes can be derived from the parent, as
> they are never switched.
> In single-db, the above-noted obstruction is no longer possible, which
> means we'll always have a URL according to the above definition.

I understand all that. My question is in the (few) cases where we
don't have an URL will we have a copyfrom URL. It seems unlikely to

Received on 2010-04-23 12:57:01 CEST

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