AW: repo on Windows -- why not?
Hi, Michael, The only thing I would refrain from is putting the repo via file:// URL on a network drive. The setup might be easier than setting up svnserve or apache, but locking on network drives is a very fragile issue, and AFAICS all projects involving locking (SVN, SQLite, BerkeleyDB, ...) discourage from such setups. Best regards Markus Schaber ___ We software Automation. 3S-Smart Software Solutions GmbH Markus Schaber | Developer Memminger Str. 151 | 87439 Kempten | Germany | Tel. +49-831-54031-0 | Fax +49-831-54031-50 Email: m.scha...@3s-software.com | Web: http://www.3s-software.com CoDeSys internet forum: http://forum.3s-software.com Download CoDeSys sample projects: http://www.3s-software.com/index.shtml?sample_projects Managing Directors: Dipl.Inf. Dieter Hess, Dipl.Inf. Manfred Werner | Trade register: Kempten HRB 6186 | Tax ID No.: DE 167014915 > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Michael Hüttermann [mailto:mich...@huettermann.net] > Gesendet: Freitag, 22. April 2011 16:30 > An: users@subversion.apache.org > Betreff: repo on Windows -- why not? > > > Hello, > > in most cases, you don't want to host a SVN repository on Windows. But, > what are common reasons to prefer other platforms, e.g. Linux? I'm > looking for some accurate arguments and facts for my book. Thanks for > your help. > > > Regards > Michael > > > > -- > Michael Hüttermann > Author of Agile ALM > http://huettermann.net
Re: How to create a link that works between OS X and Ubuntu
The link count for autobot and a1 will be 2; each name references the same file on disk. The symbolic link, however, is a pointer to a name. You can replace the file autobot without affecting a2, but if you replace autobot (rm autobot; make autobot) you will find that the connection between autobot and a is broken. Aha. Gotcha. Yes, I want a symbolic link then, since my program will be rebuilt over and over. Richard
Re: How to create a link that works between OS X and Ubuntu
On Apr 25, 2011, at 22:27, David Chapman wrote: > On 4/25/2011 7:38 PM, richard Cavell wrote: >> Further experimentation shows that symbolic links work (ln -s autobot a for >> the first command). Are hard links supposed to work? > > The hard link simply creates a new name for the file, which is probably > operating system dependent (you didn't describe the build process completely). Yes he did: >>> From: richard Cavell >>> Sent: 04/26/11 10:36 AM >>> To: users@subversion.apache.org >>> Subject: How to create a link that works between OS X and Ubuntu >>> >>> Hi everyone. I'm developing a program on Ubuntu 10.10. The directory in >>> which my project lives is part of my PATH. The executable that is built is >>> called 'autobot'. >>> >>> I type: >>> >>> ln autobot a > Subversion won't know the difference between the name "autobot" and the name > "a"; each will look like an ordinary file. A symbolic link, however, is a > different object type and Subversion can store it as such. That's correct, and that was the problem. I was reading Richard's message trying to figure out why it wasn't working, and it's exactly that Subversion doesn't (can't) realize a hardlink is a link. Use symlinks if you want to store them in the repository as links.
Re: How to create a link that works between OS X and Ubuntu
(moving top posting to bottom) - Original Message - From: richard Cavell Sent: 04/26/11 10:36 AM To: users@subversion.apache.org Subject: How to create a link that works between OS X and Ubuntu Hi everyone. I'm developing a program on Ubuntu 10.10. The directory in which my project lives is part of my PATH. The executable that is built is called 'autobot'. I type: ln autobot a a (And my program runs correctly). svn add a svn propset svn:executable ON a svn ci -m "Create shortcut" Now on my OS X box, with the current directory set to the project directory, and with that directory also being a part of PATH (although it is not named identically to the Ubuntu one), I type: svn up a And I get: -bash: /source/Autobot/autobotwiki/a: cannot execute binary file ls -l a gives me: -rwxrwxrwx 1 richard admin 55295 26 Apr 10:33 a The same thing happens if I create the link on OS X and try to run it under Ubuntu. So how do I do this? Richard On 4/25/2011 7:38 PM, richard Cavell wrote: Further experimentation shows that symbolic links work (ln -s autobot a for the first command). Are hard links supposed to work? Richard The hard link simply creates a new name for the file, which is probably operating system dependent (you didn't describe the build process completely). Subversion won't know the difference between the name "autobot" and the name "a"; each will look like an ordinary file. A symbolic link, however, is a different object type and Subversion can store it as such. Try this: ln autobot a1 ln -s autobot a2 ls -l The link count for autobot and a1 will be 2; each name references the same file on disk. The symbolic link, however, is a pointer to a name. You can replace the file autobot without affecting a2, but if you replace autobot (rm autobot; make autobot) you will find that the connection between autobot and a is broken. -- David Chapman dcchap...@acm.org Chapman Consulting -- San Jose, CA
Re: How to create a link that works between OS X and Ubuntu
Further experimentation shows that symbolic links work (ln -s autobot a for the first command). Are hard links supposed to work? Richard - Original Message - From: richard Cavell Sent: 04/26/11 10:36 AM To: users@subversion.apache.org Subject: How to create a link that works between OS X and Ubuntu Hi everyone. I'm developing a program on Ubuntu 10.10. The directory in which my project lives is part of my PATH. The executable that is built is called 'autobot'. I type: ln autobot a a (And my program runs correctly). svn add a svn propset svn:executable ON a svn ci -m "Create shortcut" Now on my OS X box, with the current directory set to the project directory, and with that directory also being a part of PATH (although it is not named identically to the Ubuntu one), I type: svn up a And I get: -bash: /source/Autobot/autobotwiki/a: cannot execute binary file ls -l a gives me: -rwxrwxrwx 1 richard admin 55295 26 Apr 10:33 a The same thing happens if I create the link on OS X and try to run it under Ubuntu. So how do I do this? Richard
How to create a link that works between OS X and Ubuntu
Hi everyone. I'm developing a program on Ubuntu 10.10. The directory in which my project lives is part of my PATH. The executable that is built is called 'autobot'. I type: ln autobot a a (And my program runs correctly). svn add a svn propset svn:executable ON a svn ci -m "Create shortcut" Now on my OS X box, with the current directory set to the project directory, and with that directory also being a part of PATH (although it is not named identically to the Ubuntu one), I type: svn up a And I get: -bash: /source/Autobot/autobotwiki/a: cannot execute binary file ls -l a gives me: -rwxrwxrwx 1 richard admin 55295 26 Apr 10:33 a The same thing happens if I create the link on OS X and try to run it under Ubuntu. So how do I do this? Richard
svn-1.6.x, serf: Error running context: Internal error.
i've a checked out, without externals, not using serf: https://gar.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/gar/csw/mgar/ and get a: $ svn up --ignore-externals svn: Error running context: Internal error this is on solaris, after switching to serf in ~/.subversion. i am not sure if this should work without problems, or such a failure could be expected. what makes me not so sure about this is e.g. the "editor drive order". see also [1][2][3]. the client is v 1.6.15, and the server, sourceforge, is 1.6.9. [1] http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2009-05/0531.shtml. [2] http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3831, marked as fixed [3] http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2932 rupert
Re: trying to get new version of files from svn archive
Guten Tag dov.kru...@americas.bnpparibas.com, am Montag, 25. April 2011 um 17:08 schrieben Sie: > Take it as fact that I'm not interested in my version of the file. So > anything svn may have decided about resolving collisions is irrelevant. Subversion can't know that until you tell it to know, using svn revert . or something like that. See svn help for details. > I want to get rid of my version of the file and get the one in the > archive. I think the reason for my confusion was that the file itself no > longer exists. Another easy way in yur case seems to be deleting your whole working copy, including the .svn directories, if you don't need any of your local changes, and simply check out a new working copy using svn co. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Thorsten Schöning -- Thorsten Schöning AM-SoFT IT-Systeme - Hameln | Potsdam | Leipzig Telefon: Potsdam: 0331-743881-0 E-Mail: tschoen...@am-soft.de Web: http://www.am-soft.de AM-SoFT GmbH IT-Systeme, Konsumhof 1-5, 14482 Potsdam Amtsgericht Potsdam HRB 21278 P, Geschäftsführer: Andreas Muchow
Re: trying to get new version of files from svn archive
Take it as fact that I'm not interested in my version of the file. So anything svn may have decided about resolving collisions is irrelevant. I want to get rid of my version of the file and get the one in the archive. I think the reason for my confusion was that the file itself no longer exists. However, to clarify for everyone, we are using svn 1.6.15, which is pretty recent under linux. my SVN_EDITOR is emacs. Internet subversion-20...@ryandesign.com 04/25/2011 10:43 AM To Dov KRUGER cc users@subversion.apache.org Subject Re: trying to get new version of files from svn archive On Apr 25, 2011, at 09:34, dov.kru...@americas.bnpparibas.com wrote: > Excuse my ignorance, I'm used to cvs. I have never used cvs, so my advice may not exactly correspond. > I edited some files at the same time as a colleague, but when we realized, he went forward, so my copies were obsolete. Not necessarily. You might have made changes to different parts of the file, which subversion would have resolved for you, in a probably proper manner. > Some time later, I tried to update, to get the new files, and to get his updated version. > > It reported the files changed, just as I would see in cvs: > > CA.txt Ok, a conflict occurred, so you and he did modify similar-enough parts of the file that subversion could not automatically merge them. You would now usually resolve the conflict manually. http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.tour.cycle.html#svn.tour.cycle.resolve You usually do this by opening the file in an editor and picking the correct lines from amongst those subversion has indicated in the file for you. You can also make use of the three additional files subversion has created (one containing the old file, one containing the new upstream file, and one containing your version) to assist you in deciding what's right. > Since I wanted the new ones, I first looked for the equivalent of > > cvs up -C > > thinking it was: > > svn up --force > > but it wasn't. > > So then I deleted the files (so I don't have a local copy at all) and again: Ok, now you don't have the file at all. > svn up > > Subversion just reports the current version number and does not try to bring the files in as cvs would. This should indeed have brought back the current version of the file. Are you sure it did not? This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Please note that certain functions and services for BNP Paribas may be performed by BNP Paribas RCC, Inc.
Re: trying to get new version of files from svn archive
Ryan Schmidt wrote on Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 09:43:03 -0500: > > On Apr 25, 2011, at 09:34, dov.kru...@americas.bnpparibas.com wrote: > > > Subversion just reports the current version number and does not try to > > bring the files in as cvs would. > > This should indeed have brought back the current version of the file. Are you > sure it did not? If it didn't, try running 'revert' or 'resolve' (or 'resolved') first.
Re: trying to get new version of files from svn archive
On Apr 25, 2011, at 09:43, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> I tried to update, to get the new files, and to get his updated version. >> >> It reported the files changed, just as I would see in cvs: >> >> CA.txt > > Ok, a conflict occurred In fact, the current version of Subversion would have asked you at this point what you want to do -- use your version, use their version, edit the file now to resolve the conflict manually, postpone until later (behaves like what you saw above). The fact that you didn't get this prompt suggests you're using an old version of Subversion and should upgrade.
Re: trying to get new version of files from svn archive
On Apr 25, 2011, at 09:34, dov.kru...@americas.bnpparibas.com wrote: > Excuse my ignorance, I'm used to cvs. I have never used cvs, so my advice may not exactly correspond. > I edited some files at the same time as a colleague, but when we realized, he > went forward, so my copies were obsolete. Not necessarily. You might have made changes to different parts of the file, which subversion would have resolved for you, in a probably proper manner. > Some time later, I tried to update, to get the new files, and to get his > updated version. > > It reported the files changed, just as I would see in cvs: > > CA.txt Ok, a conflict occurred, so you and he did modify similar-enough parts of the file that subversion could not automatically merge them. You would now usually resolve the conflict manually. http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.tour.cycle.html#svn.tour.cycle.resolve You usually do this by opening the file in an editor and picking the correct lines from amongst those subversion has indicated in the file for you. You can also make use of the three additional files subversion has created (one containing the old file, one containing the new upstream file, and one containing your version) to assist you in deciding what's right. > Since I wanted the new ones, I first looked for the equivalent of > > cvs up -C > > thinking it was: > > svn up --force > > but it wasn't. > > So then I deleted the files (so I don't have a local copy at all) and again: Ok, now you don't have the file at all. > svn up > > Subversion just reports the current version number and does not try to bring > the files in as cvs would. This should indeed have brought back the current version of the file. Are you sure it did not?
Re: trying to get new version of files from svn archive
Is your .svn directory available or that too is deleted ? which version of svn are you using ? Prabhu On Monday 25 April 2011 08:04 PM, dov.kru...@americas.bnpparibas.com wrote: Excuse my ignorance, I'm used to cvs. I edited some files at the same time as a colleague, but when we realized, he went forward, so my copies were obsolete. Some time later, I tried to update, to get the new files, and to get his updated version. It reported the files changed, just as I would see in cvs: CA.txt Since I wanted the new ones, I first looked for the equivalent of cvs up -C thinking it was: svn up --force but it wasn't. So then I deleted the files (so I don't have a local copy at all) and again: svn up Subversion just reports the current version number and does not try to bring the files in as cvs would. What am I doing wrong? This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Please note that certain functions and services for BNP Paribas may be performed by BNP Paribas RCC, Inc.
trying to get new version of files from svn archive
Excuse my ignorance, I'm used to cvs. I edited some files at the same time as a colleague, but when we realized, he went forward, so my copies were obsolete. Some time later, I tried to update, to get the new files, and to get his updated version. It reported the files changed, just as I would see in cvs: CA.txt Since I wanted the new ones, I first looked for the equivalent of cvs up -C thinking it was: svn up --force but it wasn't. So then I deleted the files (so I don't have a local copy at all) and again: svn up Subversion just reports the current version number and does not try to bring the files in as cvs would. What am I doing wrong? This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Please note that certain functions and services for BNP Paribas may be performed by BNP Paribas RCC, Inc.
