[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

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

From: Toby Thain <toby_at_smartgames.ca>
Date: 2007-06-07 01:17:17 CEST

On 6-Jun-07, at 7:02 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:

> On Jun 6, 2007, at 16:56, Toby Thain wrote:
>
>> On 6-Jun-07, at 6:28 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>>>> Also, to comment on Blair's point, I think even if we are to
>>>>> consider mixed revisions, it is an issue. If you made the
>>>>> commit from your working copy, you expect that your working
>>>>> copy will reflect that commit that you made
>>>
>>> The working copy does reflect the commit you just made. But the
>>> "svn ls" command, as explained, shows what's in the repository,
>>> not what's in your working copy, and it works by default on the
>>> revision of the directory you're in when you run the command.
>>
>> That would explain what I saw. But I found it surprising enough
>> that I posted here...
>>
>>>> Yes, that was also my expectation. This isn't a mixed-rev w.c.,
>>>> so what I saw was at least counter-intuitive, if not actually
>>>> incorrect.
>>>
>>> Most working copies are mixed-revision. At the very latest, your
>>> working copy became mixed-revision as soon as you committed, as I
>>> explained above.
>>
>> Alright. So it's normal that running 'svn up' (which had no
>> updates to bring down) would change the view of 'ls'?
>
> Let's say the revision of your directory was r11. You committed a
> file which created r12 in the repository. "svn ls" uses the
> revision of the directory you're in when it queries the repository,
> by default. So "svn ls" would show you info about r11 of the
> repository.

OK.

>
> "svn up" will bring all elements in the directory, including the
> directory, up to the HEAD revision of the repository, which, if you
> haven't made any other changes, is still r12. "svn ls" will now
> tell you baout revision 12 of the repository.
>
>
>> After the 'svn up', is it a mixed rev w.c. or not? And what's the
>> revision of . after the 'svn up'? It would still be r11, right? So
>> why did ls suddenly show me something new? I'm still not clear.
>> But I may just be dense.
>
> Use "svnversion" to determine if you're in a mixed-revision working
> copy. If you are, it will print more than one number.
>
> Also try "svn info" which will show you the revision of the item on
> which you ran the command, or the current directory if you did not
> specify.
>
> If you ran "svn up" at the root of your working copy, then your
> entire working copy is of a single revision -- until you next
> commit something.

I see this now - that a commit causes a mixed rev w.c.

> If, however, you ran "svn up" in a subdirectory of your working
> copy, then everything in that subdirectory is of a single revision,
> but its parent directory and any other subdirectories may well
> still be of other revisions.

Yes, that part I already understood.

Thanks very much for the explanations.
--Toby

>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jun 7 01:17:47 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.