I think you *always* want wq operations to be cancelable. That simply
means that wq items will be left behind and "svn cleanup" will fix it.
I see no problem with that.
Cheers,
-g
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 09:46, <rhuijben_at_apache.org> wrote:
> Author: rhuijben
> Date: Tue Aug 10 13:46:57 2010
> New Revision: 984007
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=984007&view=rev
> Log:
> * subversion/libsvn_wc/update_editor.c
> (cleanup_dir_baton): When calling wq_run() from pool cleanup, don't pass
> a cancel func as this will also be called on canceling the operation.
> And in that case you don't want to cancel running the wq items.
>
> Modified:
> subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/update_editor.c
>
> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/update_editor.c
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/update_editor.c?rev=984007&r1=984006&r2=984007&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/update_editor.c (original)
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/update_editor.c Tue Aug 10 13:46:57 2010
> @@ -496,7 +496,7 @@ cleanup_dir_baton(void *dir_baton)
> apr_pool_t *pool = apr_pool_parent_get(db->pool);
>
> err = svn_wc__wq_run(eb->db, db->local_abspath,
> - eb->cancel_func, eb->cancel_baton,
> + NULL /* cancel_func */, NULL /* cancel_baton */,
> pool);
>
> if (err)
>
>
>
Received on 2010-08-11 21:31:00 CEST