From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#13547: svn annotate - incorrect previous/next revision Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2021 05:40:37 +0300 Message-ID: <265e7b3c-06c5-7fa4-81e4-0a75fea41765@yandex.ru> References: <51025067.7070204@matholka.se> <5105105F.9040500@matholka.se> <878s28kl2e.fsf@gnus.org> <87v94snhir.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="688"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 Cc: Glenn Morris , Stefan Monnier , 13547@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen , Lars Ljung Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 31 04:41:11 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1m9ew3-000AWQ-6Q for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 04:41:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50374 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9ew1-0005td-5d for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 22:41:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33356) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9evu-0005tU-Fc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 22:41:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:49693) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9evu-0007cN-7v for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 22:41:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m9evt-0002lX-Pd for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 22:41:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dmitry Gutov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2021 02:41:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 13547 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 13547-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B13547.162769924910604 (code B ref 13547); Sat, 31 Jul 2021 02:41:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13547) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Jul 2021 02:40:49 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33006 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m9evh-0002kx-2o for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 22:40:49 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ej1-f49.google.com ([209.85.218.49]:46980) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m9eve-0002kh-6F for 13547@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 22:40:47 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ej1-f49.google.com with SMTP id gs8so20084933ejc.13 for <13547@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 19:40:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BIjBP7w9THC2AZ3jwB2Ps/YSRXkpK/s4VfUWR6x65G0=; b=JFsqoAFbRoIzcm79Uk8THzNd299EtoQnrEERT3f2jLVOq/FzvVea/S6lFqQe1HuQg/ PcBt5moihcYJQm9+713v0VdeufRK/Y9NFD0U5ScPPUPqWYxZkMLIzp4pgLZlYpEIN/s2 siQ117kB4Q8d9C7lFXpjsRAJwNtgAoYN5B5q+dbVC+oFmrk0z5RdDJYgpk1Gulz3rFUI DHb0B3kFPypm+eLFZ4ZWVHktvwHipkvZio9upbSIVT9vC3jLFWm0T5Hcs7LIntmEyAq4 dtPVf4tOERCmSatNaW3lJR+9SVt+JKaONvMn+91gjMiUtdiTu+Jk3J7/7VLDM8f8wix3 YJeA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=BIjBP7w9THC2AZ3jwB2Ps/YSRXkpK/s4VfUWR6x65G0=; b=WKLUupQAepTgReLsZJlHnZukSSH1PSgVh8ua7xpJ0BIwri4s5gVunIjUjHYHC6WRbT sNfCizfRqAzzvuw3twWkVAA3CEUk1MWzh6ErAjDSOpoSDEmlvy8JsTgDs+my+yP2v46+ ny/spwjB0A7ovYdMQ8111NZbdxzCyc/2LJi6xleQWRzAXEuoANFTcgRxn79nRSy2wwsg SIUKTgfFWgOwTF3sk23Io8dUs9fhIhEy4yITKdw5R6Z/tyCZy1QkCT491W9fb/nW2Vgq 18E6hNtXPc+ED/MijtfwIDltW3MnVNS68Ey9rszQ0wRo9FOVOeWMJ6ROWslP0Gnl7tX9 WPpw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Vrw4wtWOuRStlWuBpeHEo0wDELexSGur264kk7O0VzqMwQlch 9/Ak93Lg5QL7sD1j+cuZ3yg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz/blWidOaaA0ykeJCZyajvfMjqIuRX9xvm+msw2rYi8RL5U9j4T59hfnXrbBE4+KT+TE9cBg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:405:: with SMTP id d5mr5486627eja.189.1627699240292; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 19:40:40 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.6] ([46.251.119.176]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id dg20sm1491713edb.13.2021.07.30.19.40.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 30 Jul 2021 19:40:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87v94snhir.fsf@gnus.org> Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:210956 Archived-At: Hi! On 30.07.2021 14:54, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > >>>> Thanks. I guess the drawback here is, that will contact the svn >>>> repository, which may be on a remote server, so could be slow. >>>> >>>> It seems this is used by vc-annotate, vc-rollback, and vc-diff. >>> Yes, it will be slower. But as far as I know there is no other way to >>> get the previous/next revision of a file. >> I haven't used svn in many years, so I don't have much of an opinion >> here. I've respun the patch for Emacs 28; included below. >> >> Anybody got an opinion here? > I forgot to put Dmitry in the CCs; perhaps he'll have an opinion. Since this is about SVN, it's hard for me to have an opinion as well: all practical recollections are from ~10 years ago. How slow are SVN servers to respond to requests like this these days? Could someone also describe the effect that our current "not correct" revision numbers have? Do they trigger errors? Do them cause 'vc-annotate' to show wrong file contents? If it's either of these, then we probably should go ahead with the patch.