Comment 7 for bug 149270

Hash: SHA1

Martin von Gagern wrote:
> On 24.06.2010 21:26, Robert Collins wrote:
>> bug 129045 has a patch for this, I'm going to mark it as a dupe simply
>> because LP makes it hard to mark this one as a dupe of that. The patch
>> is at
> Doesn't work for the bug 497676 from which I came here. That bug is
> about the log builtin, while the patch you refer to only addresses the
> missing plugin. At least as far as I can tell. In other words, that
> patch is a workaround for one special case, but not a solution to the
> underlying problem. Judging from the exception name, I'm not even sure
> that bug 129045 really is the same problem at heart.
> Bug 244278, bug 497676, bug 503031 and the original report here all deal
> with branch: revspecs in combination with various read-only commands:
> status, log and vimdiff. Addressing this at the command level seems
> ill-advised to me. Instead I'd look at RevisionSpec_branch for a place
> to fix.
> There the idea seems to be that we simply fetch the revisions from the
> remote branch into the local repository for the sake of diff. We could
> probably fall back to not fetching the remote revisions if the
> transaction is read-only. I'll attach a branch with an idea for a fix.
> ** Branch linked: lp:~gagern/bzr/bug149270_RevisionSpec_branch_readonly

The problem is that if we don't fetch the revisions, we may not already
have them, but expect them to be present in the local repo.

For comparison "bzr XXX -r -1:path" will do the same thing as "bzr XXX
- -r branch:path", but will fail if those revs aren't present locally (for
most commands XXX).


Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -