svnsync,svnrdump use the svn_ra_* API, not the svn_client_* API. You should be able to use either of them if you install authz on your repository such that *any* paths touched in r683 are unreadable by the user svnsync/svnrdump connect as.
Steinar Bang wrote on Sat, May 21, 2011 at 18:26:30 +0200: > >>>>> Steinar Bang <s...@dod.no>: > > > I've been looking to see if there are any tools that can slurp out the > > history of a repository, using the svn client API. But all repository > > conversion seems to be based on "svnadmin dump". And "svnadmin dump" > > croaks on all revisions later than 682...:-/ > > svnsync and svnrdump, sounds like if they implement part of this: they > use the client API to pull down revisions for dump or export > > http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.reposadmin.maint.html#svn.reposadmin.maint.tk.svnsync > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.subversion.user/99717 > nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.subversion.user/99717 > > But they both stop on revision 683, and they refuse to start on any > revision succeeding it. :-/ > > Since it is possible to check out the parts/paths in the repository that > are interesting to me (my home directory and its branches), it would > have been nice if it was possible to tell these tools to make a clone of > a particular part of the repository into a new repository (or a dumpfile > for that matter). > > I don't care if revision numbers are preserved or not, only that the > history is preserved (and preferrably with the branching information > preserved). > > Failing that, is it possible to make all of the dump/export programs > work on revisions following 683? > > I saw something in one of the google hits about "truncating the > revision", and I tried to do so in one experiment. But as far as I can > recall dumping later versions than 683 still failed. > > (I don't need that part of the repository tree that is in 683 and > surrounding revisions, so any fix that loses it and lets me recover what > is important to me, is ok by me) > > Thanks! >
