Hyrum K. Wright wrote on Wed, 26 May 2010 at 16:16 -0500:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Steve Armstrong
> <steve.armstrong_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I'm seeing strange behaviour on a Win7_64 machine running the 1.6.9
> > command-line binaries.
> >
> > I have a working copy checked out (C:\wc). Inside it, there's an empty
> > folder that's source-controlled (C:\wc\logs). If I delete the .svn folder
> > from within logs, then doing an "svn st" in the base folder (C:\wc) gives
> > me:
> >
> > C:\wc>svn st
> > ~ log
> >
> > Trying to update to "bring back" the folder shows a delete:
> > C:\wc>svn up
> > D log
> > Updated to revision 200374.
> >
> > The folder is still there, without a .svn folder inside it, and svn doesn't
> > know what to do with it.
> > C:\wc>svn st
> > ? log
> >
> > At this point, the repository still shows the folder (the delete didn't
> > happen on the server). After deleting the log folder, svn thinks
> > everything's fine (even though the folder is now totally missing from the
> > working copy)
> >
> > C:\wc>svn st
> >
> > Reverting the folder to bring it back does nothing:
> > C:\wc>svn revert log
> > Skipped 'log'
> >
> > Doing a general update doesn't work:
> > C:\wc>svn up
> > At revision 200376.
> >
> > Only by doing an update directly to log can I get the folder back:
> > C:\wc>svn up log
> > A log
> > Updated to revision 200376.
> >
> > There are reasons that I probably shouldn't have this skeleton under source
> > control in the first place, but this seems like broken behavior regardless.
> > Should I file it as a bug? Or is it already known?
> >
>
> I wouldn't file a bug. Per-directory .svn directories are disappearing in
> 1.7,
Will per-directory .svn's remain as an option in 1.7+? (I thought yes...)
> and it's unlikely that the bug (if that's what it is) would be address
> specifically for the 1.6.x line.
>
> -Hyrum
>
Received on 2010-05-27 22:02:23 CEST