On 2005-06-25 10:07:57 -0700, Kevin Hung wrote:
> --- Dominic Anello <email@example.com> wrote:
> > On 2005-06-24 09:12:24 -0700, Kevin Hung wrote:
> Hi Donminic,
> Thank you very much for your tip. You are correct.
> Once I use the command "svn list -r HEAD -v .", then
> svn returns the correct revision number.
> However, do you think there is some inconsistency in
> this command? For example, if I do "svn list help.txt
> -v", then it works. Should the command "svn ls -v" be
> translated into "svn list -r HEAD -v ."?
It's not inconsistent because the first command you give is specifically
targeting a file, while the second is implicitly targeting a current
So if the directory is at r7 and the file is at r9, then the first
command will list the file at r9, while the second command will list the
contents of the directory *as it exists in the repository* at r7.
> So should I always "svn list -r HEAD -v" (via alias)
> on everything (eg. local file, local directory,
> repository file and repository directory)?
Either that or get in the habit of doing an "svn up" after committing.
Received on Tue Jun 28 16:32:42 2005
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored