On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 02:35:25PM -0500, Dan McGee wrote:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Lukas Fleischer <archlinux@cryptocrack.de> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 03:24:31PM -0400, Dave Reisner wrote:
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 09:15:03PM +0200, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 02:58:03PM -0400, Dave Reisner wrote:
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 08:44:12PM +0200, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 04:38:28PM -0500, Dan McGee wrote: > We don't need to invoke svn copy on each file; it accepts multiple > arguments. This cut Allan's time releasing one patch-friendly package > from 5 minutes to 2 minutes. > > Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org> > --- > archrelease | 5 ++--- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/archrelease b/archrelease > index 2f6a563..7bb4c8a 100755 > --- a/archrelease > +++ b/archrelease > @@ -52,9 +52,8 @@ for tag in "$@"; do > svn add --parents -q "repos/$tag" > fi > > - for file in "${known_files[@]}"; do > - svn copy -q -r HEAD "$trunk/$file" "repos/$tag/" > - done > + # copy all files at once from trunk to the subdirectory in repos/ > + svn copy -q -r HEAD ${known_files[@]/#/$trunk/} "repos/$tag/"
+1 from me. I wondered why we were looping over the single files in the first place. However, if we copy from current HEAD anyway, I don't see any reason to not just use `svn copy -q -r HEAD "$trunk/" "repos/$tag/"` here.
+1 from me provided we quote the array expansion.
$ known_files=(foo "bar baz") trunk=/some/path
$ printf '%s\n' ${known_files[@]/#/$trunk/} /some/path/foo /some/path/bar baz
$ printf '%s\n' "${known_files[@]/#/$trunk/}" /some/path/foo /some/path/bar baz
Well, how is this superior to just copying the whole trunk directory?
No idea. Will svn copy pick up files that aren't tracked? (packages, src/, pkg/, signatures...)
Nope, shouldn't. Unless I missed something. We copy from current HEAD and already committed to trunk before, so we shouldn't miss any files when using plain "copy" here.
Because you'd be reverting the whole damn reason I made these changes in the first place- to prevent the silly extra commit. SVN will *not* let you svn rm a directory and then copy a new one in its place in the same commit.
Nope, what I wanted to suggest is `svn rm` the files and `svn copy` the directory thereafter. Obviously, SVN doesn't have any option to copy the content of a directory only, though... :/ So, +1 to your patch with Dave's quoting fix applied :)
What you suggest is exactly what we used to do: http://projects.archlinux.org/devtools.git/commit/?id=8384ad849dfe308ed3e63e...
-Dan