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

Re: Explanation on the conflict and "svn resolve" functionnality

From: Alexis Boutillier <alexis.boutillier_at_arteris.net>
Date: 2004-04-06 19:03:57 CEST

That is obvious that my cleanAll module is over-zealous and need
correction.

What I still doesn't understand completly is why deleting the two tmpfiles
*is* a way of "informing svn directly that the conflict is resolved."
I mean that all the other svn command need to use a "svn" like command as
"svn add", "svn del" to make a modification in the database so why isn't
it nescessary to run "svn resolved" to resolve the conflict even if you
delete the tmp files ?

It's like it is a special functionnality for the resolution of conflict
that doesn't work the same way as all other svn command, especialy
deletion. If you delete a file with "rm toto" svn doesn't interpret it
like "svn delete toto". So why does it do so for "svn resolved"?

On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 11:17:06 -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman
<sussman@collab.net> wrote:

> [Please reply to the users@ list, not to me personally!]
>
> On Tue, 2004-04-06 at 11:06, Alexis Boutillier wrote:
>> I understand the solution that are in place.
>>
>> I agree it's is therefore a bettre solution than CVS but why is it
>> possible to resolved a conflict without informing directly svn that the
>> conflict is resolved ?
>
> You misunderstand. Deleting the two tmpfiles *is* a way of "informing
> svn directly that the conflict is resolved."
>
>> I mean the tmpfiles are not under svn controle,
>
> Actually, they *are* under svn control. They're listed in the
> .svn/entries file, attached to the entry. That's why svn notices when
> you've deleted them.
>
>
>> I wonder why thoses files are not in the .svn/textbase entry because
>> they
>> are not related with the svn files or why there is not a conflicting
>> state
>> writen on the file in the .svn/entries ?
>
> Of course there is. Look at the entry: it has a "conflicted" state
> attached to it, as well as pointers to the two tmpfiles.
>
>> I came to this because i run a cleanAll module that erase all files that
>> are not under svn by using "svn status". I know it is a little hard way
>> to do that but i left the svn directory with a modified file instead of
>> a
>> conflicting file.
>
> Then perhaps your cleanAll module is a bit too over-zealous. If 'svn
> status' reports that foo.c is conflicted, then your module should not
> delete any '?' files that match the pattern 'foo.c.*'.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
>

-- 
Boutillier Alexis
Methodology engineer
Arteris SA
The Network-on-Chip Company (TM)
www.arteris.net
6 parc Ariane Immeuble Mercure
78284 Guyancourt Cedex
France
Office: (+33) 1 61 37 38 71
Fac:    (+33) 1 61 37 38 41
Alexis.Boutillier@arteris.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Apr 6 19:04:32 2004

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.