[rancid] [PATCH 1/2] Better support for subversion repositories

[Zenon Mousmoulas]

On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 21:59:34 +0000, john heasley <heas at shrubbery.net>
wrote:
> Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 08:10:28PM +0200, Zenon Mousmoulas:
>> On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 22:28:38 +0000, john heasley <heas at shrubbery.net>
>> wrote:
>> > Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 03:36:45PM +0200, Zenon Mousmoulas:
>> >> Improve subversion support:
>> >> - Support arbitrary subversion URLs as (pre-provisioned)
repositories.
>> >> - Do not overwrite an existing local repository.
>> >> - Avoid "svn: Directory '<GROUP>' is out of date" message.
>> >>   Included for completeness, copied from Debian patch
>> >>   by Nicolas DEFFAYET <nicolas-ml at deffayet.com>:
>> >>  
>>
http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/dl/rancid/2.3.6-1/09_svn.dpatch
>> >> 
>> >> +++ rancid-2.3.6-grnet/bin/control_rancid.in	2011-11-26
>> >> 00:12:08.000000000 +0200
>> >> @@ -167,6 +167,12 @@
>> >>      fi
>> >>  fi
>> >>  
>> >> +# svn update to avoid 'Out of date' error
>> >> +if [ $RCSSYS = svn ]
>> >> +then
>> >> +    svn update
>> >> +fi
>> > 
>> > why is this necessary?  it should never be out of date, unless
someone
>> has
>> > altered the repository, in which case you want to be alerted to that.
>> 
>> We "inherited" this due to merging with the Debian patch I
>> mentioned earlier, while forward porting our changes to 2.3.6. Since
>> we initially tried to apply our changes on top of the Debian package
>> for 2.3.6 (rather than vanilla 2.3.6), we had a conflict with the
>> other hunk from this Debian patch:
>> 
>> --- rancid~/bin/rancid-cvs.in
>> +++ rancid/bin/rancid-cvs.in
>> @@ -131,6 +131,8 @@
>>  	    svn import -m "$GROUP" . file:///$CVSROOT/$GROUP
>>  	    cd $BASEDIR
>>  	    svn checkout file:///$CVSROOT/$GROUP $GROUP
>> +	    cd $DIR
>> +	    svn update
>>  	fi
>>      fi
>>      cd $DIR
>> 
>> So rather than sending only this change (which is required and has
>> been tested) we opted for merging with the Debian patch.
>> 
>> I am not sure however when the change you noted would be necessary and
>> I certainly can not object to your reasoning against it. Therefore I
>> suppose we can drop this hunk.
> 
> there are three cases that i am aware of - 1) someone changes the
> respository
> from another working set, 2) host crashes leaving files mangled (rare),
or
> 3) when svn:ignore property is altered.  i dont understand why changing
> that
> property on the directory requires an update, but it does and that was
> added
> to 2.3.6.

Got it, OK.

>> I can send an updated patch if you are OK with the rest of the
>> changes.

?