On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Olivier Sannier <obones_at_free.fr> wrote:
> Thanks for this, but none of the externals are tied to a particular
> revision, neither peg nor operative.
> This is why I find this behavior quite surprising.
If none of the externals are tied to a peg or operative revision, then
updating their containing directory to ANY revision will ALWAYS update
the externals themselves to HEAD.
In other words, you're using them wrong, if you want the ability to
check out the externals as they existed at a specific revision of the
containing project. They are acting as designed.
The SVN book
explicitly recommends peg revisions for exactly the scenario you're
having trouble with:
> You should seriously consider using explicit revision numbers in all
> of your externals definitions. Doing so means that you get to decide
> when to pull down a different snapshot of external information, and
> exactly which snapshot to pull. Besides avoiding the surprise of
> getting changes to third-party repositories that you might not have
> any control over, using explicit revision numbers also means that as
> you backdate your working copy to a previous revision, your externals
> definitions will also revert to the way they looked in that previous
> revision, which in turn means that the external working copies will be
> updated to match the way they looked back when your repository was at
> that previous revision. For software projects, this could be the
> difference between a successful and a failed build of an older
> snapshot of your complex codebase.
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].
Received on 2016-12-05 18:39:53 CET