> But ... but ... you said it *did* output an error:
>
> "... result in the expected error 'Unable to find repository location' ..."
>
> Did you read my comments and apply them to wrong section of your mail?
i apologize, i read your email to fast.
Your are right - this is actually the expected error for numbered revision ranges - as I wrote myself at the top.
Sorry for the noise...
About the other cases "-r 2:HEAD" or "-r HEAD:2".
I would expect a patch to do the following:
The two revision variables START_REVNUM and END_REVNUM in "svn_client_log5" (libsvn_client/log.c) must be verified to be related to path_at_PEG.
This can be done using the function "svn_client__repos_locations".
Since that call is only necessary if START/END_REVNUM is greater that the PEG_REV i would perform this check only if that is the case.
Would that be a suitable fix?
Do you have any doubts against this approach?
If not i could try to post a patch in the next hours.
Dirk
Received on 2011-06-17 19:53:55 CEST