On 1/31/07, Rob Hubbard <Rob.Hubbard@celoxica.com> wrote:
> When you use "cvs" below, I presume you mean "svn" (perhaps you've aliased
> the command).
Yes of course, it sould be "svn" (I'm using both, so sometimes I mix them
The "svn mv" commands are significant. It may be that "trunk/subdir" existed
> back to revision 1 (even if it has been moved), but that the trunk into
> which it has been moved does not. Was the "trunk" directory *created*
> (without being moved or copied from something else) at around revision 900?
Yes I think you are right. I guess the the significant revisions are those
given below (note that the actual subdir name is "tcs" and not "subdir" as
in my previous example).
r903 | holmberg | 2006-10-11 09:36:17 +0200 (on, 11 okt 2006) | 2 lines
A /base/trunk/tcs (from /base/trunk/trunk:902)
r902 | holmberg | 2006-10-11 09:35:54 +0200 (on, 11 okt 2006) | 2 lines
A /base/trunk/trunk (from /base/tcs/trunk:901)
r901 | holmberg | 2006-10-11 09:34:38 +0200 (on, 11 okt 2006) | 2 lines
I made those changes rather "naively" in the repository browser of
TortoiseSVN. I had no idea that it should have such consequences.
Until my current "incident" I have imagined that a "svn log" command would
operate by returning *all* revisions after *filtering* to only show those
revisions that affects files *currently* under a given path (even if they
were somewhere else before).
Note that "http://svn.server/my/proj/trunk" may not be the same object in
> different revisions. Have a read of the SVN book about peg revisions.
Thanks for the tip. I'll have to read it carefully later to understand if it
applies to my current situation.
What range of revisions do you get with
> svn log -q --stop-on-copy http://svn.server/my/proj/trunk/subdir
> What do you get with, say,
> svn log -q http://svn.server/my/proj/trunk@450
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> > Sent: 31 January 2007 10:55
> > To: email@example.com
> > Subject: "svn log" not reaching revision 1
> > Hi!
> > I tried to run "svn log -v" on the top of one of my projects, and was
> > surprised that the revisions returned "stopped" at a certain number
> > (e.g. 901). The revisions shown were then 1209-901, and revision 900-1
> > seemed to have disappeared. But when I ran "svn log -v" on a
> > subdirectory of the project I got all revisions 1209-1.
> > The commands I used were:
> > $ cvs log -v http://svn.server/my/proj/trunk
> > # gives 1209-901
> > $ cvs log -v http://svn.server/my/proj/trunk/subdir #
> > gives 1200-1
> > I also tried to give an explicit "-r1209:1" option, but that didn't
> > change anything.
> > I have looked at the revisions around 901, suspecting that I might
> > have done something that Subversion "didn't like". Some of the commits
> > were reorganizations (e.g. svn mv) of the top directories of the
> > project. But should such operations really be that harmful?
> > Other than these observations I have no clue as to what is wrong. Can
> > anybody help me explain what is going on?
> > /Johan Holmberg
> This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs
> Virus Scanning Service, on behalf of Celoxica Ltd.
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the use of the
> individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received
> this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material
> immediately. Whilst this email has been swept for viruses, you
> should carry out your own virus check before opening any
> attachment. Celoxica Ltd accepts no liability for any loss or
> damage which may be caused by software viruses or interception
> or interruption of this email.
Received on Wed Jan 31 14:24:40 2007