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

Re: Bogus mergeinfo in trunk

From: Stefan Fuhrmann <stefanfuhrmann_at_alice-dsl.de>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 22:26:35 +0200

On 02.08.2011 17:41, Philip Martin wrote:
> Prabhu Gnana Sundar<prabhugs_at_collab.net> writes:
>> I was in the process of writing a script which would record the
>> mergeinfo and see if there are any bogus mergeinfos.
>> When I ran my script against our trunk source I was able to see the
>> following error:
>> <snip>
>> svn.core.SubversionException:
>> ("'/repos/asf/!svn/bc/1072301/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/svn_temp_serializer.c'
>> path not found", 160013)
>> </snip>
>> By looking at the logs and further investigation, it was clear that
>> there is a bogus mergeinfo at revision "1081136".
>> I guess we need to remove/rectify the bogus mergeinfo.
> r1081136 was some sort of --record-only merge that just modified
> mergeinfo. The trunk mergeinfo change matches the log message:
> Modified: svn:mergeinfo
> Merged /subversion/branches/performance:r992904,1029230,1067697-1078365
> but there are subtree mergeinfo changes that are harder to understand.
> For subversion/libsvn_subr/svn_temp_serializer.c the change is:
> Added: svn:mergeinfo
> Merged /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/svn_temp_serializer.c:r1067687-1072301
> which refers to trunk not branches/performance, I don't think that is
> correct. svn_temp_serializer.c didn't exist on trunk before 1072303, it
> was created on the performance branch and merged/copied to trunk in
> 1072303, so that may be what caused the error.
> For subversion/libsvn_subr/adler32.c the change is:
> Modified: svn:mergeinfo
> Merged /subversion/branches/performance/subversion/libsvn_subr/adler32.c:r1067697-1078365
> which does refer to the branch but doesn't have the two early revisions
> 992904 and 1029230. adler32.c didn't exist in libsvn_subr before
> r1054277 when it was copied from libsvn_diff.
> Stefan, can you recall how you did this merge?
Not really. I remember the partial merge / cherry-picking
trying to evade conflicts. But I don't recall any details,
not even the tool version used. Could have been some
close-to-HEAD trunk at that time.

-- Stefan^2.
Received on 2011-08-02 22:27:24 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.