Linedata Services (UK) Ltd
Registered Office: Bishopsgate Court, 4-12 Norton Folgate, London, E1 6DB
Registered in England and Wales No 3027851 VAT Reg No 778499447
> From: Andy Levy [mailto:andy.levy_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: 03 March 2010 11:31
> To: Giulio Troccoli
> Cc: users_at_subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Update failed with "is not a working copy"
> message on externals
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 05:14, Giulio Troccoli
> <Giulio.Troccoli_at_uk.linedata.com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> > We are starting using externals to publish some
> documentation for our customer. The repository contains test
> files and documentation about the testing. Some of these
> files and docs need to be made available to our customer. So
> I thought of creating a Public folder and define the
> svn:external property to pull down only the bits that we need.
> > As part of the process however we decided to also reorganise the
> > documents, especially because some of the original file are buried
> > into 5 or more directories. An example of svn:external would be
> > ^/api/5.31/Completed%20Projects%20(non-iTest%20docs)/5.11.23
> > 5.31/5.11.23
> > This works very well, creating the 5.31 and 5.11.23
> directories. However, if we want to pull down a single file, e.g.
> "5.31/basic data cleansing/End To End _basic data cleansing.xls"
> > then svn update fails with the message
> > Fetching external item into '5.31\basic data cleansing\End
> To End _basic data cleansing.xls'
> > svn: warning: '5.31\basic data cleansing' is not a working copy
> > I thought I couldn't pull down a single file but only
> directories but
> > the manual says I can, and if I change the external as
> "End To End _basic data cleansing.xls"
> > then the file is retrieved.
> > I have looked in the archive and the only related message I
> found is a
> > very old one about subversion 1.2.3
> > http://svn.haxx.se/tsvnusers/archive-2005-12/0068.shtml
> > So, it seems to me this is a bug. I was able to write a
> little ksh script (attached) to reproduced the problem.
> Not only does it seem like a bug, it seems like this one.
I don't know about that. I tried the reproduction script at the top of that bug report and it works, which is not surprising since the report says it has been fixed in 1.6.6 (and I'm using 1.6.9).
Received on 2010-03-03 12:53:36 CET