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

RE: svn diff - Is this behaviour expected?

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_vmoo.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 05:34:08 -0700

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vincent Lefevre [mailto:vincent-svn_at_vinc17.net]
> Sent: zaterdag 14 augustus 2010 15:01
> To: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: svn diff - Is this behaviour expected?
> On 2010-08-14 04:05:17 +0100, chris0_at_lavabit.com wrote:
> > Is this expected/desired? Should I create a new issue? (I couldn't
> > find anything similar.)
> > Is there a consistent (backwards & forwards compatible) syntax I can
> > use?
> I have the same problems at least on the cases without -r.
> This doesn't match the description of "svn diff" in the book:
> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn-book.html#svn.ref.svn.c.diff
> Conversely, when blah has been added, but not committed,
> svn diff -rBASE blah
> gives a diff instead of an error (indeed an error is expected because
> blah_at_BASE doesn't exist, as this can been seen with "svn cat blah").

If I remember correctly comparing to BASE does not compare to the version in
the repository, but to the local pristine version. Just like not providing
-rBASE. (Compare it to -r<revision of base>).
We can't break this common use case without breaking almost every user of
the local diff feature.

svn cat uses a different definition.

Received on 2010-08-15 14:35:16 CEST

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.