> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip Martin [mailto:philip.mar...@wandisco.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 16 juli 2013 10:14
> To: Alexander Haley
> Cc: Johan Corveleyn; users@subversion.apache.org;
> d...@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: xml output changed - relative paths now appearing?
>
> [CC to dev]
>
> Alexander Haley <aha...@meditech.com> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Philip Martin
> > <philip.mar...@wandisco.com>wrote:
> >
> >> I could not get this to happen on Linux. Are you using the same path in
> >> the checkout and status commands? Can you provide a complete recipe?
> >> Something to do with drive letters, or case differences perhaps?
> >>
> >
> > I am using WindowsXP - the svn binaries came from TortoiseSVN. I've
> > attached the batch file script which can reproduce this, as well as
> > transcripts from a machine with svn 1.7.x and another with 1.8.0 for
> > comparison. My reported snag is the 6th line of the XML output, where
> the
> > two differing results are:
> >
> > 1.7.x path="C:\testing\bug-test">
> > 1.8.0 path="..\..\..\bug-test">
>
> svnadmin create repo
> svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc
> svn mkdir wc/foo
> AbsWC=`pwd`/wc
> cd wc/foo
> svn st --xml $AbsWC
>
> With 1.7 I get
>
> <target
> path="/home/pm/sw/subversion/obj/wc">
> <entry
> path="/home/pm/sw/subversion/obj/wc/foo">
>
> while with 1.8 I get
>
> <target
> path="/home/pm/sw/subversion/obj/wc">
> <entry
> path=".">
This appears wrong to me.
svn status always gave the paths in the same form as how the user passed
them, in both non-xml and xml form.
I would guess that a lot of scripts break down if the paths don't match the
form that they expected from all previous versions.
>
> The entry for 'foo' can only be identified by interpreting the path
> relative to the current directory, information that is not part of the
> XML. That feels wrong to me.
Agree.
>
> If I use a relative path "svn st --xml .." then 1.8 gives what looks
> more useable output:
>
> <target
> path="..">
> <entry
> path="../foo">
>
> The non-XML output shows the same paths, I suppose it makes more sense
> but the difference between absolute and relative paths remains:
>
> svn st $AbsWC
> A
>
> and
>
> svn st ..
> A ../foo
>
> Which output form do we want? Perhaps we should be printing paths
> relative to the target rather than the current working directory?
I would guess we somehow make the current directory change the output form?
I think we should revert to the old form, where the input path dictates the
form in which we provide paths. Certainly for the --xml option, any other
form will break scripts.
Bert
