On Wednesday 12 May 2010, Andy Levy wrote:
> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 09:23, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
> > I think the exit code subversion returns isn't right, it should indicate
> > an error
[...]
> > $ svn update /etc
> > Skipped '/etc'
> > $ echo $?
> > 0
>
> Why? The command executed successfully a
On May 13, 2010, at 5:43 AM, Campbell Allan wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 12 May 2010, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
>> Consider this:
>>
>> $ svn -q --non-interactive update /blah-blah
>> $ echo $?
>> 0
>>
>> No output even to stderr, no indication of a failure at all.
>> Subversion doesn't always used inte
On Wednesday 12 May 2010, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
> Consider this:
>
> $ svn -q --non-interactive update /blah-blah
> $ echo $?
> 0
>
> No output even to stderr, no indication of a failure at all.
> Subversion doesn't always used interactively, hence --non-interactive
> switch. If you made a mistake
Why? The command executed successfully and reported what it did.
"ls /blah-blah ." successfully lists the . directory, but still returns
an error code because of the user error in its first argument.
There may be a reason why svn chooses to almost ignore bad input but
it's a surprise for sur
Consider this:
$ svn -q --non-interactive update /blah-blah
$ echo $?
0
No output even to stderr, no indication of a failure at all.
Subversion doesn't always used interactively, hence --non-interactive switch.
If you made a mistake in a script it will be unnoticed (well, this was my
unpleasant
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 09:23, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think the exit code subversion returns isn't right, it should indicate an
> error
>
> $ svn --version
> svn, version 1.6.11 (r934486)
>
>
> $ svn update /blah-blah
> Skipped '/blah-blah'
> $ echo $?
> 0
>
> $ svn update /etc
> Skippe
Hi,
I think the exit code subversion returns isn't right, it should indicate an
error
$ svn --version
svn, version 1.6.11 (r934486)
$ svn update /blah-blah
Skipped '/blah-blah'
$ echo $?
0
$ svn update /etc
Skipped '/etc'
$ echo $?
0
Vadym
