[svk-devel] svk 2.0 confusing messages

Alexandru Popescu the.mindstorm.mailinglist at gmail.com
Sat Jan 13 20:33:18 EST 2007

On 1/13/07, Andrew Ruder <andy at aeruder.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 10:02:48AM +0200, Alexandru Popescu wrote:
> > After running 15 or 20 times the above commands the messages got away.
> > I got the impression that what solved the problem was running a smerge
> > command with the synch mirror option. Frankly speaking I still belive
> > this is a bug, but considering that nobody commented on it makes me a
> > bit uncomfortable calling it so.
> As Viktor wrote, the "problem" is that svk does not make a commit
> without some sort of data change.  svk keeps track of what it has merged
> in a property, so in order to keep track of what has been merged it must
> have a commit to do so on.
> Example:
> You have merged up to revision 2 of remote/trunk in your local/trunk
> If you do svn proplist -v file:///home/<yourusername>/.svk/local/trunk
> You will see something like:
>   svk:merge : 13f7ca84-9c03-0410-bd7d-801fa6cd78ca:/:2
> It is that property that is keeping track of what you have merged so
> far.
> You make a change in remote/trunk AND in local/trunk (the same change).
> You do a smerge, it says 'Empty Merge' and nothing is committed.  The
> problem is now that since it didn't make a commit it could not update
> the svk:merge property on local/trunk.  The next time you do an smerge,
> it once again sees that it has up to revision 2, so it does the empty
> merge again.
> Now let's say you make another change on just remote/trunk (revision 4)
> You do the smerge, you will see the 'Empty Merge' for revision 3, then
> it will merge revision 4's changes.  Now, when it merge's revision 4's
> changes, it can make a commit and therefore update that svk:merge
> property to say its got revisions 1-4.
> In short, without a commit happening, svk can not keep track of what it
> has merged already so you will continue getting empty merge's until you
> make a real commit that has changes to merge.  I personally much prefer
> it this way as I would -=not=- want svk making commits all the time just
> to update its metadata.  (It would make the log on local/trunk much
> harder to follow).
> Cheers,
> Andy
> --
> Andrew Ruder <andy at aeruder.net>
> http://www.aeruder.net

Thanks a lot Andrew for the explanation. Moreover by reading this
explanation I have figured out how to fix the problem I have posted on
the thread "misusage". Basicaly I have editted the values on my local
svn and removed the bogus entry. Great!

.w( the_mindstorm )p.

More information about the svk-devel mailing list