> Ideally the TortoiseSVN team would push their patches and need
upstream to OpenSSL so that it was possible to tell it the cert to use
(not sure how the PIN would be handled). Once that was done, then the
Subversion source code could potentially be modified to use this API as
TortoiseSVN did in i
> It would be best to ask on the TortoiseSVN list so that they could
tell you definitively
> I know that the TSVN devs have made some custom patches to OpenSSL to
resolve this issue of the constant prompting
Thanks Mark. Looks like you are right in that tsvn will support this in
an upcoming releas
> If building yourself, use a recent version of OpenSSL and
> build it with the MSCAPI support.
Thanks Mark. Having some problems with my build this time but the
collabnet binaries do work as you say. Great.
Except... Is there a facility to get it to remember the last certificate
I selected, a
Hi Mark,
> What are you using for your client binaries? Where did you get them?
>
> You need binaries that are compiled with the proper support
> for this from OpenSSL.
Good question... I believe I compiled them myself from the 1.6.15 tag.
> BTW, the OpenSSL approach uses MSCAPI so you get
Hi,
I am trying to get subversion to work with a smartcard (gemalto
cryptoflex.net), on Windows. The server-side bit of the setup is correct
afaik. At least it works in my browser, I am prompted for a certificate
and then pin.
I am using svn 1.6.15. It looks like I should just specify the pkcs#11
> It would be interesting to see if you can reproduce the
> problem in your environment with the 1.7.0-alpha1 release.
Hi Stefan... I will certainly give that a try.
> If you can reproduce it with 1.7, and have the time, could
> you try to come up with a reproduction recipe that produces
I
> Hmmm...
> Does the parent of the offending directory have
> non-inheritable mergeinfo?
> (Mergeinfo entries that have an asterisk appended are not
> inheritable.)
Hi Stefan...
Before the merge only the source (/trunk) and target
(branches/topic-XYZ) have mergeinfo, not parents or sub-director
Hi Johan,
> This is normal behavior of svn currently. Every subtree that
> already has "explicit mergeinfo" (meaning it has its own svn:mergeinfo
> property) will have that mergeinfo updated on every subsequent merge.
> That is done because it needs to be kept up to date.
Thanks for your respons
Further information on this... it's definitely not related to the authz
as the same behaviour happens when using the file: protocol. It appears
to be to do with the mergeinfo that's already present, as if I delete it
all then it works as expected.
When doing a merge, is the mergeinfo anywhere othe
Morning,
Recently, when any user merges up from trunk to their topic branch, svn
appears to do it directory by directory for immediate sub-directories of
the branch root, so each sub-directory gets explicit mergeinfo.
[X:\XYZ.11650]svn merge http://svn.example.net/ABCD/Source/trunk
--- Merging r
> I'm dealiing with people who like Fisheye, which I've never
> used, and want them to be able to use ssh or svn+ssh access
> to the master Subversion repositories. Does this work well?
> Has anyone used this?
It should work fine, we use jira-svn integration over svn+ssh, which I
mention becaus
Thanks Stefan.
> If getting a fix for this in 1.6.x is important to you, feel
> free to file an issue requesting a fix the for 1.6.x branch.
> Maybe someone will find time for this. Make sure to link back
> to this thread in the mail archives from the issue. Thanks.
I probably won't, as the u
Morning,
I have reproduced the problem discussed here (single file externals
cause mergeinfo on directories and files containing file externals):
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2010-08/0088.shtml in the latest version
of the 1.6.x branch, which is affecting a repo in our production
environment.
R
> I am trying to write a hook to prevent deletion of elements through a
pre-commit hook.
If you're not using the bindings you'd want svnlook, probably svnlook
diff.
But, do you really want such a hook? If a user has permission to add
stuff they should be allowed to also unwind any mistakes, prov
> There's a transcript of how to reproduce the issue here:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4934990/
In your batch file it should be
exit 1
Not exit /b 1. /b doesn't set the exit code for cmd.exe so I presume svn
never receives the error code.
jamie
> Where "thread" is a link to
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2010-08/0456.shtml
Thanks Stefan. I had actually read all that ;-) I just thought because
the talk was listed as it was perhaps Wandisco had managed to get this
feature in. It's not even a feature that I am that desparate for, in
compa
> It is listed as "unscheduled", meaning it is not slated to
> appear in any particular version of Subversion at this time.
> 1.7 is already full of WC-NG so I would expect the devs to
> want to move any other major changes to the next version.
Indeed, hence my question to the list. And yes, th
> What you're looking for is an "obliterate" function. That's
> been discussed a number of times in the past, and never been
> successfully pursuied.
The last update I've seen about the obliterate feature imply that it's
been abandoned for the medium-term:
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2010-0
> Sounds overly cautious to me. And what happens if the branch
> you tagged from is ended?
Well, they could still branch from the branch that has ended, just not
merge back there without resurrecting it.
We have a complicated hierarchy of branches, and it seems like the
concensus advice is to tr
Afternoon,
We've enforced a rule whereby tags cannot be copied. I know this sounds
backwards but I need some help in justifying it.
The reason why we're preventing it is because it's not clear where to
merge back to, and in fact encourages merging back to the tag, which is
also blocked.
What we'
>We see exactly the same problem on two diff. Windows PCs,
> but I'll give ImDisk a bash in the morning for the sake of
> experimentation.
Have you tried Process Explorer? Look at the stack trace of one of the
events when it's started slowing down. Make sure the symbol server is
configured.
On second thoughts my previous mail is related to when you have a
massive number of sub-dirs in your working copy. I didn't properly read
you mail, sorry.
Perhaps your Master File Table is fragmented... In which case a defrag
might help.
==
>I know that there's a negative speed difference on NTFS,
> and that 1.7's WC-NG might make this better, but this is
> getting near-logarithmically slower.
There's good information about NTFS wrt subversion here:
http://superuser.com/questions/15192/bad-ntfs-performance
I found FAT was 10-2
> And it can happen naturally during refactoring.
> For example, you might want to split a file into two distinct
> files, preserving their common history.
Good point. Thanks.
jamie
===
Please access the attached hype
Thanks Stefan, excellent answer.
> It was basically assumed that users would easily grok the UI
> because a "copy" is a simple concept that's also known to
> people who haven't used version control before.
> However, when you also do advanced stuff like merging you
> need to understand how to
> This mailing list is for the Subversion core software. You
> should send that feedback to the separate list that exists
> for TortoiseSVN.
Will do, thanks for that.
Sorry to impose, but would you mind telling me if you received this
message from me via the list yesterday:
http://svn.haxx.se/u
Hi,
In tortoise you can define a start_commit_hook which you can use to for
instance set a default comment based on the state of the working copy.
This is a useful feature.
The problem is that a user can leave the commit dialog open, make
changes to the WC, then F5 in the commit dialog. My reque
Afternoon,
For some client-side Tortoise hooks (which are for the purpose of
preventing people shoot themselves in the head in all the myriad ways
Subversion allows), I need to get the ancestor-branch, ie where the
current branch/tag was copied from.
My current strategy for doing this is svn log
Should Subversion allow a merge on top of a file that already contains
an unresolved conflict? Run the script below to set up the scenario.
The first merge introduces a conflict, the second merge contains
incoming changes to the conflicting section. The second merge is applied
successfully to the
29 matches
Mail list logo
