> >> svk is asking (unnecessarily, one might conclude) > >> if you > >> want to create the local Replica before it answers the question 'svk > >> info' > >> on a newly created test dir.
>> But shouldn't the test be non-interactive? :) > The test could check for the existence of $HOME/.svk or $SVKROOT before > running any svk commands to avoid this problem. I think that runs into the wish to not get into the internals of svn/svk/git in doing these tests. Not sure I agree, but that was a comment I saw somewhere. It does seem svk could have a "are you setup?" query or not start setup up on a bare 'info' ... but there seems something wrong w/ the Parrot::Revision doing 3 consecutive svn/git/svk trys at info and just living w/ the dieing/missing exes as a brute-force sort of test. I mean, if we know enough to ask 'svn -xml info' [1], then using $HOME/.svk or $SVKROOT (though I think svk looks in at least 3 places, which may just be their point ;-) doesn't seem to be peaking too far under the covers. Could Configure do a more thorough job of finding svn/git/svk and/or finding out which (if any) was used to get the build? Suppose that only helps Parrot::Revision in the building situation. a [1] The reason I got into this mess was adding "-xml" to the svn info test broke on my box w/ an old version of svn. It made smoke reports fail w/ an 'invalid format' and it took a while to trace that back to a bad rev number (zero) and that to svn -xml info failing into /dev/null but being treated as saying "yep, ver zero here!" Andy Bach Systems Mangler Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (608) 261-5738 Fax: 264-5932 Windows defenstrated - sent from my MacBook Pro (using Notes)!!!
