> From: Ryan Schmidt
> Sent: Wednesday, 7 August 2013 12:39 PM
> On Aug 6, 2013, at 15:55, Denis Gadelha wrote:
>
> > Also when trying to show 'svn log' I'm getting: RA layer request
> > failed svn: Unexpected HTTP status 501 'Method Not Implemented' on
>
> Similar error was reported recently o
On Aug 6, 2013, at 15:55, Denis Gadelha wrote:
> Also when trying to show ‘svn log’ I’m getting: RA layer request failed svn:
> Unexpected HTTP status 501 'Method Not Implemented' on
Similar error was reported recently on this list.
Are you running a very old version of Subversion on the serv
I got the following error when 'svn diff with url' from tortoisesvn right click.
Please help.
Also when trying to show 'svn log' I'm getting: RA layer request failed svn:
Unexpected HTTP status 501 'Method Not Implemented' on
Surprisingly enough when doing just regular: 'check for modifications'
Guillaume,
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Lieven Govaerts wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Guillaume Lasnier
> wrote:
>> Hi Lieven,
>> Please find attached the tcpdump that dumps traffic between my laptop and
>> the proxy. The only information I could get about the proxy is
Hi,
Is there something obvious missing during compilation for such error?
bash-3.2$ /home/userb/svn/bin/svn co http://svnserver/svn/repositoryA/
/tmp/repoA/
/home/userb/svn/bin/svn: symbol lookup error:
/home/userb/svn/lib/libsvn_ra_neon-1.so.0: undefined symbol: ne_accept_207
Version was 1.7.
On our setup (10k RPM SAS RAID-10 across 6 spindles, AMD Opteron 4180
2.6GHz), we're finding that "svnadmin verify" is CPU-bound and only uses
a single CPU core.
Is it possible that "svnadmin verify" could be multi-process in the
future to spread the work over more cores? Or is that technical
If do a google search for "svn commit parents" you'll see I'm not the first to
unofficially request this and come across this issue. I suspect most others
just kludged around this and found a subtree to checkin with additional work
involved. I see the need for this quite often when I'm running
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Fredrik Orderud wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>>
>> Yes, go ahead and file an issue, and include links to this and the other
>> mail thread in the description.
>>
>> At this point, I am not sure whether I'd call it a defect or an
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> Yes, go ahead and file an issue, and include links to this and the other
> mail thread in the description.
>
> At this point, I am not sure whether I'd call it a defect or an
> enhancement request (asking for a new optional strict mode for
Please use reply all to include the list. More below ...
On 6 Aug 2013 08:48, "Fredrik Orderud" wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 11:31 PM, Johan Corveleyn
wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Fredrik Orderud
wrote:
>> > What happens in r5 is that repeated merging of the same change doe
10 matches
Mail list logo
