> Am 05.11.2018 um 21:55 schrieb Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel_at_gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 6:28 PM Dr. Rolf Jansen <rj_at_obsigna.com> wrote:
>>> Am 05.11.2018 um 20:43 schrieb Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de>:
>>> On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 08:21:20PM -0200, Dr. Rolf Jansen wrote:
>>>> and of course the GitHub server does support HTTP/DAV.
>>>> # svn co https://github.com/cyclaero/ContentCGI.git/trunk ContentCGI
>>>> svn: E170013: Unable to connect to a repository at URL 'https://github.com/cyclaero/ContentCGI.git/trunk'
>>>> svn: E175003: The server at 'https://github.com/cyclaero/ContentCGI.git/trunk' does not support the HTTP/DAV protocol
>>> There is a problem at Github's end with SVN 1.11.
>>> See the thread titled "Problems accessing GitHub's SVN-bridge with SVN 1.11"
>>> on this very mailing list: https://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2018-11/0008.shtml
>> In the meantime, I saw this thread.
>>> There is a problem at Github’s end with SVN 1.11.
>> Reading the whole thread, my impression is that there is another issue with the Robustness Principle of software design on Subversion’s end. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_principle.
>> I won’t hold on my breath, until the Subversion Developers and the GitHub engineers sorted out their animosities. I put the patch shown below to /usr/ports/devel/subversion/files/patch-zz-DAV-robustness.local on my FreeBSD system, and then I reinstalled the port - problem solved. Happy discussions!
>> Best regards
> May I suggest never simply expanding a comment to take out a chunk of
> live code ,such as you've done in your patch? If you have to take out
> a chunk of live code, add a *separate* coment about why you're doing
> it, and add a distinct set of comment marks around it. This will make
> merges *much* cleaner for the future.
>> --- subversion/libsvn_ra_serf/options.c.orig 2018-02-25 10:22:55.000000000 -0300
>> +++ subversion/libsvn_ra_serf/options.c 2018-11-05 20:50:29.431635000 -0200
>> @@ -403,7 +403,7 @@ options_response_handler(serf_request_t
>> /* Bail out early if we're not talking to a DAV server.
>> Note that this check is only valid if we've received a success
>> - response; redirects and errors don't count. */
>> + response; redirects and errors don't count.
>> if (opt_ctx->handler->sline.code >= 200
>> && opt_ctx->handler->sline.code < 300
>> && !opt_ctx->received_dav_header)
>> @@ -413,7 +413,7 @@ options_response_handler(serf_request_t
>> _("The server at '%s' does not support the HTTP/DAV protocol"),
>> + */
>> /* Assume mergeinfo capability unsupported, if didn't receive information
>> about server or repository mergeinfo capability. */
>> if (!svn_hash_gets(session->capabilities, SVN_RA_CAPABILITY_MERGEINFO))
In general, you’re right, in the special case, the patch is meant to be used as a hot fix on FreeBSD production systems, and it is in no way meant to make it into the upstream code base.
Received on 2018-11-06 01:07:23 CET