----- Original Message ----

> On Sep 2, 2010, at 11:27, BRM wrote:
> > I recently had my  subversion server die - the box, not subversion itself - 
>and 
>
> > have been  working through the recovery process.
> > Part of that is going through and  modifying a number of projects for the 
>change 
>
> > in the URL - namely  changing from a non-standard port for apache to a 
>standard 
>
> >  port.
> > We have started using svn:externals in some projects, but did not  use the 
> > relative path values - instead, specifying the whole URL; so I  need to 
>update 
>
> > the URLs in the svn:externals.
> > 
> > I know I  can get the values using 'svn pget svn:externals'; but the SVN 
>redbook 
>
> >  recommends against using pset/propset to set the values.
> > So, how do I  set the values from a script? "svn help pset" seems to show a 
>"-F" 
>
> >  parameter for reading the values from a file. This seems like it would 
> > take 
>care 
>
> > of the concern mentioned issue - that the externals are  multi-line.
> > If that is the case, then shouldn't the note say to use that  parameter 
> > with 
>pset 
>
> > or use pedit instead of flatly saying use  pedit?
> > Or is there another reason why I shouldn't use pset?
> 
> If  you can afford to have the repository offline, make a dumpfile, twiddle 
> it, 
>load  it
> into a new repository, and have everybody check out new working copies, you  
>may
> want to consider doing that. The twiddling step would be done with the  
>svndumptool
> script. The advantage would be that you could correct the externals  
>definitions in all
> past revisions of the repository too, not just the HEAD, so  that anybody 
>needing to
> check out a past revision would still have working  externals in the 
>repository's new
> location. And do use relative externals this  time so you won't have to do 
> this 
>kind
> of surgery ever again, noting that the  relative externals syntax is only 
>compatible
> with Subversion 1.5 and  higher. 

That's a good thought. I might try doing that tonight. I'm aware of they syntax 
compat issue, and have no problem
saying that we have to use 1.5 or higher; it's just a matter of getting the 
update through.

Ben

Reply via email to