Mailing-List: contact dev-help@subversion.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
From: "Bert Huijben" <bert@qqmail.nl>
To: "'Marc Strapetz'" <marc.strapetz@syntevo.com>,
	=?utf-8?Q?'Branko_=C4=8Cibej'?= <brane@apache.org>,
	<dev@subversion.apache.org>
References: <56557614.1080203@syntevo.com> <565582B2.3000203@apache.org>
 <5655CEF7.90805@syntevo.com>
In-Reply-To: <5655CEF7.90805@syntevo.com>
Subject: RE: JavaHL: "Not implemented" error in StatusEditor.addAbsent
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 17:04:23 +0100
Message-ID: <003e01d1279a$f5629320$e027b960$@qqmail.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AQE85uIEYuU0BdEApBoow1Aa1xmWGwGdLDswAkoPVwSfti3UMA==
Content-Language: nl


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Strapetz [mailto:marc.strapetz@syntevo.com]
> Sent: woensdag 25 november 2015 16:09
> To: Branko =C4=8Cibej <brane@apache.org>; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: JavaHL: "Not implemented" error in StatusEditor.addAbsent
>=20
> On 25.11.2015 10:43, Branko =C4=8Cibej wrote:
> > On 25.11.2015 09:49, Marc Strapetz wrote:
> >> One of our users has reported following Exception against =
Subversion
> >> 1.9.2:
> >>
> >> Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: Not implemented:
> >> StatusEditor.addAbsent
> >>      at
> >>
> =
org.apache.subversion.javahl.remote.StatusEditor.addAbsent(StatusEditor.j=

> ava:110)
> >>      ... 15 more
> >>
> >> Actually, StatusEditor.addAbsent looks like this:
> >>
> >> public void addAbsent(String relativePath,
> >>                        NodeKind kind,
> >>                        long replacesRevision)
> >> {
> >>    //DEBUG:System.err.println("  [J] StatusEditor.addAbsent");
> >>    checkState();
> >>    throw new RuntimeException("Not implemented:
> StatusEditor.addAbsent");
> >> }
> >>
> >> Is there any more debug information I should try to collect?
> >
> > Well, it's not implemented ... I can't think of anything more =
specific?
>=20
> I'm wondering whether it was not implemented by intention, because =
it's
> not expected to be called (same as for copy/move)? Actually, this is =
the
> only user who is experiencing this problem, so conditions causing this
> problem seem to be very specific. Fortunately it's currently perfectly
> reproducible for him. Should I ask for an "svn status -u" output?

This should be perfectly reproducable when you call status on a =
directory that contains subdirectories that you are not allowed to read =
(via a mod_authz_svn config file or similar svnserve config).

svn status -u explicitly ignores absent nodes.

	Bert