Hyrum,
This fixes all tests except for blame 7 [on the ev2-export branch].
There is a potential hole, noted in the comments which I may try to
write a test for.
Cheers,
-g
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 4:47 PM, <gstein_at_apache.org> wrote:
> Author: gstein
> Date: Fri May 18 20:47:43 2012
> New Revision: 1340245
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1340245&view=rev
> Log:
> Improve the detection of whether a node can be created at a given path.
>
> Specifically, if the path represents a child from an ancestor's copy,
> move, or rotate, then we should allow further changes to that child.
> Since the child is uncommitted, the REPLACES_REV will be
> SVN_INVALID_REVNUM.
>
> * subversion/libsvn_fs/editor.c:
> (can_create): update docstring. add ancestor checks for *-here ops.
>
> Modified:
> subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs/editor.c
>
> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs/editor.c
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs/editor.c?rev=1340245&r1=1340244&r2=1340245&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs/editor.c (original)
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs/editor.c Fri May 18 20:47:43 2012
> @@ -34,6 +34,8 @@
>
> #include "fs-loader.h"
>
> +#include "private/svn_fspath.h"
> +
>
> struct edit_baton {
> /* The transaction associated with this editor. */
> @@ -269,21 +271,56 @@ can_modify(svn_fs_root_t *txn_root,
>
>
> /* Can we create a node at FSPATH in TXN_ROOT? If something already exists
> - at that path, then the client is out of date. */
> + at that path, then the client MAY be out of date. We then have to see if
> + the path was created/modified in this transaction. IOW, it is new and
> + can be replaced without problem.
> +
> + Note: the editor protocol disallows double-modifications. This is to
> + ensure somebody does not accidentally overwrite another file due to
> + being out-of-date. */
> static svn_error_t *
> can_create(svn_fs_root_t *txn_root,
> const char *fspath,
> apr_pool_t *scratch_pool)
> {
> svn_node_kind_t kind;
> + const char *cur_fspath;
>
> SVN_ERR(svn_fs_check_path(&kind, txn_root, fspath, scratch_pool));
> - if (kind != svn_node_none)
> - return svn_error_createf(SVN_ERR_FS_OUT_OF_DATE, NULL,
> - _("'%s' already exists, so may be out"
> - " of date; try updating"),
> - fspath);
> - return SVN_NO_ERROR;
> + if (kind == svn_node_none)
> + return SVN_NO_ERROR;
> +
> + /* ### I'm not sure if this works perfectly. We might have an ancestor
> + ### that was modified as a result of a change on a cousin. We might
> + ### misinterpret that as a *-here node which brought along this
> + ### child. Need to write a test to verify. We may also be able to
> + ### test the ancestor to determine if it has been *-here in this
> + ### txn, or just a simple modification. */
> +
> + /* Are any of the parents copied/moved/rotated-here? */
> + for (cur_fspath = fspath;
> + strlen(cur_fspath) > 1; /* not the root */
> + cur_fspath = svn_fspath__dirname(cur_fspath, scratch_pool))
> + {
> + svn_revnum_t created_rev;
> +
> + SVN_ERR(svn_fs_node_created_rev(&created_rev, txn_root, cur_fspath,
> + scratch_pool));
> + if (!SVN_IS_VALID_REVNUM(created_rev))
> + {
> + /* The node has no created revision, meaning it is uncommitted.
> + Thus, it was created in this transaction, or it has already
> + been modified in some way (implying it has already passed a
> + modification check. */
> + /* ### verify the node has been *-here ?? */
> + return SVN_NO_ERROR;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return svn_error_createf(SVN_ERR_FS_OUT_OF_DATE, NULL,
> + _("'%s' already exists, so may be out"
> + " of date; try updating"),
> + fspath);
> }
>
>
>
>
Received on 2012-05-18 23:20:18 CEST