Kamesh Jayachandran wrote on Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 21:22:05 +0530: > On 12/08/2010 09:21 PM, Julian Foad wrote: >> On Sat, 2010-12-04, Kamesh Jayachandran wrote: >>>> I understand your patch fixes the following two cases. >>>> >>>> 1. svn di -cN explicitly_reinstated_file_with_mod_at_rN >>>> Hi Kamesh and Prabhu. >>>> What you're describing here sounds good - it sounds like a simpler and >>>> more definite change than what I understood before - but I'm not sure >>>> precisely what "explicitly_reinstated_file_with_mod_at_rN" means. >>> I mean the following, >> [...] >> >> Thanks, Kamesh - that clarifies it. So that's the case where a file is >> deleted and then a pre-deletion revision of it is copied back to the >> same path where it existed before. >> >> In my experiments I find the same problem also exists when a file is >> copied to a new path from a revision older than the value of HEAD at the >> time of the copy. For example: >> >> $ cd wc >> >> $ echo "line1"> test.c >> >> $ svn add test.c >> A test.c >> >> $ svn ci -m "" test.c >> Adding test.c >> Transmitting file data . >> Committed revision 1. >> >> $ svn mkdir ^/foo -m "An unrelated change" >> >> Committed revision 2. >> >> $ svn cp test.c new.c >> A new.c >> >> $ echo "line2">> new.c >> >> $ svn ci -m "" new.c >> Adding new.c >> Transmitting file data . >> Committed revision 3. >> >> $ svn diff -c3 new.c >> svn: Unable to find repository location for 'new.c' in revision 2 >>
That looks similar to the issue #2873 ('svn diff -cN of file added in rN') that stsp tried to persuade me on IRC into looking into a couple of days ago. (I still haven't closed the editor instance open on that part of the code) >> $ svn diff -c3 >> Index: new.c >> =================================================================== >> --- new.c (revision 0) >> +++ new.c (revision 3) >> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ >> +line1 >> +line2 >> >> >>>> Please could you include a test for these cases in your patch? Then it >>>> will be absolutely clear. >>> Prabhu already has one. Right now he is working on removing the >>> profileration of UI param diff-copy-from from all the layer in favour >>> of generic send_copyfrom_args. >> That's great. It would be good to include the above test scenario as >> well. >> >> Thanks. >> - Julian > > Sure he would. Right now he is teaching the 'svn_wc_get_diff_editor6' > what he has taught for svn_client__get_diff_editor. > > He will have tests for that too. > I've been on this list for several years, and that's the first time I hear "he will" and "he would". > With regards > Kamesh Jayachandran >> >> >> >> >> >> >