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

Re: svn commit: r1064847 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/svnserve/serve.c

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 05:23:49 +0200

hwright_at_apache.org wrote on Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 20:01:35 -0000:
> Author: hwright
> Date: Fri Jan 28 20:01:35 2011
> New Revision: 1064847
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1064847&view=rev
> Log:
> * subversion/svnserve/serve.c
> (log_cmd): Remove a useless check, and replace it with an assert instead.
>
> Modified:
> subversion/trunk/subversion/svnserve/serve.c
>
> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/svnserve/serve.c
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/svnserve/serve.c?rev=1064847&r1=1064846&r2=1064847&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/svnserve/serve.c (original)
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/svnserve/serve.c Fri Jan 28 20:01:35 2011
> @@ -2008,18 +2008,17 @@ static svn_error_t *log_cmd(svn_ra_svn_c
> revprops = NULL;
> else if (strcmp(revprop_word, "revprops") == 0)
> {
> + SVN_ERR_ASSERT(revprop_items);
> +
> - if (revprop_items)

<as far as I can tell>

The 'protocol' document explicitly allows the tuple to terminate
immediately after the 'revprops' word --- which, is the case where the
assert would fire; therefore, either your new check violates the
documented protocol, or the protocol documentation needs to be fixed.

</as far as I can tell>

Makes sense?
Received on 2011-01-29 04:28:19 CET

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