Seventh column of "status" output
julianfoad at btopenworld.com
Fri May 29 09:45:01 CDT 2009
On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 13:47 +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:11:12AM +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> > > -------- Forwarded Message --------
> > > From: Fabian Cenedese <Cenedese at indel.ch>
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > I think I found another error in the docs, for svn status.
> > > http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.ref.svn.c.status.html
> > >
> > > "The out-of-date information appears in the seventh column"
> > In svn 1.6, the tree-conflict indicator was inserted at column 7 and the
> > out-of-date indicator moved to column 9. (I think the o-o-d indicator
> > was in column 8 in svn v1.5, not column 7, so that text was quite a long
> > way out of date.)
> > I am updating the book... Committed revision 3531. Thanks for reporting
> > this.
> This could have happened by accident when the code was modified.
If you mean "the way the code is written makes it easy to change the
formatting by accident" then I agree, to some extent.
But in this case I made the change deliberately, and adjusted the test
suite to match, in r33247:
'Add a blank column to the "svn status" output after the first six
columns, to make way for a tree-conflict status indication.'
'In "svn status", report tree conflict status on each victim
I've just edited the log message for r33288 to explain this better.
> Note that in the code, we use string literals like " C %s\n"
> using a fixed amount of leading whitespace... not very late-night
> hacking friendly, so such mistakes can creep in easily.
> I also noted some discrepancy at some point between reading about
> what the output should be and how many columns were actually
> printed. Never tried to find the cause, though :/
More information about the svnbook-dev