From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Stricker Subject: Re: Fwd: Error with git-svn pushing a rename Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:36:29 +0100 Organization: FutureLAB Message-ID: <5286235D.9060602@futurelab.ch> References: <5285CE6C.2030609@futurelab.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Benjamin Pabst X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Nov 15 14:36:40 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VhJZe-00010a-Oe for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:36:39 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751275Ab3KONgf (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Nov 2013 08:36:35 -0500 Received: from host-179.futurelab.ch ([62.2.169.179]:47690 "EHLO primus.futurelab.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751065Ab3KONge (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Nov 2013 08:36:34 -0500 Received: from astricker.futurelab.ch (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by primus.futurelab.ch (8.13.8/8.13.8/fL-3.7) with ESMTP id rAFDaUsi023354; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:36:30 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi Benjamin > thanks for your link. Can you give me the exact version you > downgraded svn to? svn, Version 1.7.10 (r1485443) I tried to reproduce the problem with git version 1.8.4.2 and Subversion version 1.8.4 (r1534716) with a fresh and pristine subversion repo and a git-svn clone of it: I didn't manage to reproduce the rename issue. Then I switched subversion back to 1.7.10, created both the repo and the git-svn clone, switched againt to 1.8.4.2 and then got an error. Unfortunately I didn't check if the subversion perlbindings were regenerated, so I'm not exactly sure. I'll repeat the test again, as soon I've find the time. It looks like a fresh git svn clone may fix the problem. Regards, Andy