Re: 'svn ls' not consistent with w.c. status? (1.4.3)

Toby Thain wrote:
> ... after committing r12 from this working copy (Subclipse), I tried:
>
> $ svn ls -v
> 2 emil 17987 Jun 02 12:41 GPL
> 11 emil 1136 Jun 05 19:00 Makefile
> 11 emil 1616 Jun 05 19:00 README
> 11 emil 2293 Jun 05 19:00 addr_calc.c
> 11 emil 5406 Jun 05 19:00 disasm.c
> 11 emil 6359 Jun 05 19:00 emul.c
> 11 emil 4718 Jun 05 19:00 in_out.c
> 11 emil 3046 Jun 05 19:00 loader.c
> 11 emil 1814 Jun 05 19:00 reg_flags.h
> 11 emil 1163 Jun 05 19:00 version.h
>
> I was surprised that none of the files updated in r12 were marked as
> such, so I did:
>
> $ svn up
> At revision 12.
>
> Then 'ls' showed what I expected:
>
> $ svn ls -v
> 2 emil 17987 Jun 02 12:41 GPL
> 12 toby 1140 Jun 05 20:40 Makefile
> 11 emil 1616 Jun 05 19:00 README
> 11 emil 2293 Jun 05 19:00 addr_calc.c
> 11 emil 5406 Jun 05 19:00 disasm.c
> 12 toby 6345 Jun 05 20:40 emul.c
> 12 toby 4786 Jun 05 20:40 in_out.c
> 12 toby 3128 Jun 05 20:40 loader.c
> 11 emil 1814 Jun 05 19:00 reg_flags.h
> 11 emil 1163 Jun 05 19:00 version.h
>
> Is this normal behaviour?

Yes, you never pull updates down from the server for files that were not
committed.

See the mixed revision working copy portion of the Svn boko.

http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.2/svn.basic.in-action.html#svn.basic.in-action.mixedrevs

Regards,
Blair

--
Blair Zajac, Ph.D.
Subversion training, consulting and support
http://www.orcaware.com/svn/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org