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

Re: svn commit: r988074 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline: svntest/wc.py upgrade_tests.py

From: Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 15:58:03 +0100

"Bert Huijben" <bert_at_qqmail.nl> writes:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Julian Foad [mailto:julian.foad_at_wandisco.com]
>> If, instead, we construct each the PRISTINE table entry at the point
>> where we're converting an entry from the entries file, then we can
>> calculate both checksums on the fly, and we can store both of them in
>> the new DB row(s). That's true even for those few pristines that don't
>> have any checksum in the 'entries' file.

Or we could modify the current code that constructs the pristine table
to update the base/working nodes as well.

> 1.0.0 working copies have no checksums at all if I remembered
> correctly and we certainly have to upgrade those WCs. Same recipe
> for all files with a revert base.

Well, upgrade_tests 7 (basic_upgrade_1_0) passes in single-db and it
verifies the pristine text post-upgrade using MD5. When I look in the
tarball I see checksums in the entries file.

Revert bases won't have a checksum, but until we have NODE_DATA there
is nowhere to put a revert base checksum.

Received on 2010-08-24 16:58:50 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.