At 05:17 PM 12/16/2005 +0100, Armin Rigo wrote: >Hi Phillip, > >On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 10:59:23AM -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote: > > The "Revision" from "svn info" isn't reliable; it doesn't actually relate > > to what version of code is in the subtree. It can change when nothing has > > changed. > >Indeed, the patch should not use the "Revision" line but the "Last >Changed Rev" one. > > > SVN does track the actual > > *changed* revision, it just takes a little more work to get it. > >Not if you're happy with "Last Changed Rev": > > LC_ALL=C svn info | grep -i "last changed rev" | cut -f 4 -d " " You left off the all-important "-R" from "svn info", and the "sort -nr | head -1" at the end. The "Last Changed Rev" of the root is not necessarily the highest "Last Changed Rev", no matter how or where you update or check out. Try it and see.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4