In the SVN book
following is said for when updating a vender library with a new version:
To perform this upgrade, we checkout a copy of our vendor branch, and
replace the code in the current directory with the new libcomplex 1.1
source code. We quite literally copy new files on top of existing files,
perhaps exploding the libcomplex 1.1 release tarball atop our existing
files and directories. The goal here is to make our current directory
contain only the libcomplex 1.1 code, and to ensure that all that code
is under version control. Oh, and we want to do this with as little
version control history disturbance as possible.
After replacing the 1.0 code with 1.1 code, svn status will show files
with local modifications as well as, perhaps, some unversioned or
missing files. If we did what we were supposed to do, the unversioned
files are only those new files introduced in the 1.1 release of
libcomplex-we run svn add on those to get them under version control.
The missing files are files that were in 1.0 but not in 1.1, and on
those paths we run svn delete. Finally, once our current working copy
contains only the libcomplex 1.1 code, we commit the changes we made to
get it looking that way.
My issue is with the following:
"svn status will show files with local modifications as well as,
perhaps, some unversioned or missing files"
How can it show missing files when the previous paragraph said:
"We quite literally copy new files on top of existing files"
Thus the old files will still be there unchanged, and files that are in
the new version that haven't changed will also be there but unchanged.
To know what not in the latest version but is in the previous version
two options are open:
Comparing the two versions independently (i.e. in different directories)
and then deleting them using svn delete.
Or Leaving the .svn directories intact and physically delete the
previous version files from the file system (not subversion) and then
copy the new version over the top. svn status will now show the deleted
files with "!" symbol.
Is there a better way? And does the book need correcting?
David Wyles - Technology is our speciality.
This message has been scanned by MailController - www.MailController.altohiway.com
Received on Wed Jun 6 11:23:04 2007