Re: Why --force with mv?

On Tuesday 21 December 2004 01:17, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> On Dec 19, 2004, at 10:19 PM, Anthony Shipman wrote:
> > If I try to rename a file with 'svn mv' and it has been modified then
> > I get a
> > message like
> >
> > svn: Use --force to override this restriction
> > svn: Move will not be attempted unless forced
> > svn: 'LDAPIf.h' has local modifications
> >
> > What am I being protected from here? Is there some risk to the version
> > tree or
> > am I being protected from doing something dumb?
>
> Subversion doesn't have true moves. 'svn mv' == 'svn cp; svn rm'.
>
> If you try to 'svn rm' a modified file, you'll get the same warning.
> Subversion does everything it can to avoid destroying unversioned data.
> So both 'svn rm' and 'svn mv' ask you to --force any deletion that
> would do so.
>

Does this mean that 'svn mv' destroys data or that it's not smart enough to
realise that the 'svn cp' part has saved it?

-- 
Anthony Shipman                     | Toothpicks
A.Shipman@vorticeresearchgroup.com  | Great deals on new and used items.
                                    | Search for toothpicks now! -aff
                                    | www.eBay.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org