[answer auto-selected by bounty system against my will]
I'm using subclipse, and always when delete a folder in Eclipse, and try to commit it, the following errors raise:
svn: Item <folder> is out of date
svn: DELETE of <folder>: 409 Conflict (http://myintranet)
Deleting and commiting via command line works fine, but what's wrong with doing it via subclipse? Is anyone more experiencing this problem?
(I experienced this problem in Ubuntu 9.10 and 10.04; last Eclipse version; and subclipse 1.4 - as the next versions of subclipse have much more bugs)
--updated: Its when I delete folders, not files
Isn't that addressed by the Subclipse FAQ?
Whenever you see "out of date" in an error message it means that the revision of the item in the repository is newer than the copy in your local working copy.
The solution is always going to be to run an update, so that your working copy is up to date with the repository, and then do the commit again (assuming that the update did not generate any conflicts).
For files, this is usually pretty easy to understand how and why this happens.
However, Subversion also versions folders, and it is usually with folders that this problem most often happens.
Subversion does not allow you to delete/rename a folder OR change its versioned properties, UNLESS the local copy of the folder is at the HEAD revision of the folder in the repository.
Your next question might be:
"OK, I can maybe understand that, but why is my folder out of date? I am the only person working in this repository."
That is a valid question, the answer lies in the way that Subversion works.
When you commit a change to a file, the revision of the file in your working copy is updated to that new revision when the commit completes, however the version of the parent folder(s) of that file is not updated.
This is because there may have been adds/deletes to other files in that folder and until you have run an update, the folder is not really at that new revision.
This is called "mixed revision working copies".
In summary, the answer is always to do an update so that the folder or file is updated to its HEAD revision.
About "Mixed Revision Working Copies":
One special kind of flexibility is the ability to have a working copy containing files and directories with a mix of different working revision numbers.
One of the fundamental rules of Subversion is that a “push” action does not cause a “pull,” nor vice versa.
Just because you're ready to submit new changes to the repository doesn't mean you're ready to receive changes from other people.
The fact is, every time you run svn commit your working copy ends up with some mixture of revisions.
The things you just committed are marked as having larger working revisions than everything else. After several commits (with no updates in between), your working copy will contain a whole mixture of revisions
(and that is why, I believe, you cannot reproduce your "out of date" message on subsequent commits with folder deleted: your update did solve the "mixed revision" state.)
Mixed revisions have limitations
You cannot commit the deletion of a file or directory that isn't fully up to date.
If a newer version of the item exists in the repository, your attempt to delete will be rejected to prevent you from accidentally destroying changes you've not yet seen.
i think if you UPDATE before that it should work.. it did work for me
There's a simple solution without installing some extra software. I also had this "problem" and what you can do is the following:
1) open the SVN Repository view
2) there go to the folder you want to get rid of and delete it
3) go back to the java view
4) update the folder in your project you actually deleted / update your project should also work
That solved the problem in my case, as updating only retrieved the files I deleted
Subclipse has many problems like this. It works 90% of time, and then it just DOES NOT work as it should! I am using subclipse, since it is very well integrated into eclipse, and when I have problem or some bigger moves needed in svn (like merging some branch) I use Tortoisse.
I had the thing with directory like you. Then I just run the TortoiseSVN like #luiscolorado suggests, and it helped. Tortoise is so great tool (it has many great features for diffing, applying patches, getting patches and so on.).
Today I had a problem when I have removed a file, and someone had changed the same file! Then subclipse shows conflict (up to this point everything is ok), so I wanted to revert! But then the revert button is missing (disappears when inconflict mode!) so I have to do merge, and merge does not work, throws some kind of error. I didn't bother to read (maybe I should read and file it as a bug to subclipse maintainers ;-(), I knew the tortoisse will work, and you know what, it worked. There was a REVERT option.
So #Tom Brito, try command line, try Tortoisse, and then you can look at the subclipse changelog and file a bug. I think that subclipse just forgets to show us some directory changes and updates (or it is designed not to do it?), but I may be wrong.
Tom,
You might want to try TortoiseSVN, and manually update the project workspace. Find the location of your project directory in your hard drive, and then try TortoiseSVN (or the command line if it's your preference) to do the update.
A frequent cause of this problem is to delete the directory without "informing" SVN. For instance, if you manually delete the directory using the operating system instead of using SVN, you will have this problem.
If you removed the directory before you installed the subversion plug-in, but the project already existed in the repository, you will experiment this problem. A solution, in this case, would be to recreate the directory, updating/committing, and then delete again the directory.
Good luck.
My solution to this was
Delete all items in folder
Commit to repository
Update folder to HEAD
Delete folder in Eclipse
Commit to repository
A bit cumbersome, maybe, but it always works
The only working way in same cases is via command line. The subclipse is still not perfect..
Related
I'm in a lot of trouble.
During a composer update, somehow, the git process crashes and I have lost all my edits since last commit. It looks like there was an hard reset of my repository.
In eclipse I can find all the history files but I have to iterate on every file to check if it was changed and get the last version.
Unfortunately the massive "restore from local history" on the project doesn't work for edited file but only for deleted.
Is there any way to browse eclipse history and get all the last versions?
I know there are inside .metadata.plugins\org.eclipse.core.resources.history but they are hashed and probably I have many version of the same file.
I've shuffled things around, moving my files to another directory. Now when I click Show History, I only see the branch that I moved the files in.
I'm using eclipse neon, latest version of the mercuraleclipse plugin.
Here are the changes I made. There are old projects that have the source (.java) files in the top-level. So I created a src directory and used hg move to move the files under src. Once I did this, when I click on a file to see the history, It only shows the one change in the new mercurial branch I made the change in.
First thing that comes to mind is which version of MercurialEclipse are you using?
I'm asking because I have solved this very issue a few months ago in the official MercurialEclipse repository. The fix required also making a small change to the library that hgE uses, namely javahg.
Also, maybe that it'll help to have this in your .hgrc file (this file is in C:\Users\theUserName on my Windows 8.1 system. Please, refer to the Mercurial documentation for other systems)
[defaults]
log = -f
addremove = --similarity 100
commit = -A
I'm not sure that log = -f is pertinent to this issue but I have these lines in my file. I can't believe I didn't comment each of these so as to know why each is necessary or useful. Since the fix on August 31, commit = -A is no longer necessary , but I keep it in the file just in case I use hg on the command line.
As a rule of thumb, you may also check directly on the command line whether any problem you encounter with hgE also shows up with hg. That will provide the team as a whole with some useful insight.
Make sure that you use a build of hgE from after that date. If you still have this problem later on, please open an issue on the BitBucket tracker with as many details as possible. I'll fix the problem and we'll update this question with the solution/answer.
OK, I admit that I must have screwed up when I started using EGit. I started using Eclipse Galileo as a welcome alternative to Notepad edit and command-line compilation. Somewhat later I discovered that Git was integrated into Eclipse, and happily started using it.
I do not remember all the details, but it seems that I made an initial mistake that has been carried on from one computer to another and one Eclipse upgrade to another.
I have consistently tried to specify that source files are in project subdirectory src and their products are in project subdirectory bin. Git wants to archive anything in bin, as well as project metadata at the same directory level.
In the past I have been so mono-focused on the project that I just sprinkled gitignore files everywhere and clicked on "Ignore" when preparing a commit. But now that the project has been brought to a dead halt due to problems in Eclipse Kepler I have resolved to try to disentangle the mess while upgrading to Eclipse Luna.
As I see it, there are three alternatives: (1) Figure out a way to separate the various directories, (2) Brute force copy-and-paste the 300 some-odd source files into a new, clean directory structure (complicated by the fact that there are currently four open Git branches and several uncommitted changes) or (3) copy the current mess and continue to deal with extraneous "changed" files.
Alternative number one is of course the most desired.
Any suggestions?
(Later)
Please be patient with me. I am a newby in this venue. But quite experienced in other venues, where I learned to search for similar questions before posting.
I did try to search for similar problems, to no avail. I also noticed that, while composing my question, there appeared a list of other questions that might be related. None seemed applicable, so I ignored it. When I came back to see if there were any answers, there was the list again and this time I found Eclipse + EGit: clone project into workspace. Perhaps it was there at the top of the list when I finished composing. I'll know to look next time.
I tried the first recommendation, cloning via EGit from the current location to a new one. It seemed to work okay, but there are a couple of things missing: Only the specified branch is available (not MASTER) and the extensive history for the last three years is reduced to one entry dated at the time of cloning.
Fortunately, the other three branches (including MASTER) are not currently divergent. If necessary, I can manually create them again - if there is some way to recover or display the complete history in the clone.
I was not surprised to see that the several unstaged changes in the source were not present. I can deal with those manually, but I wonder if it would help if I staged them before my next attempt to clone?
(Staging those changes may or may not be possible. I became very frustrated with problems using Eclipse Kepler and gave up trying to do anything more to resolve the problems several months ago. I did not document the problems, and by now have forgotten what they were. I have a vague memory of trying to commit current changes and running into fatal errors.)
Now I think I have a more focused question - or rather several questions:
(1) When upgrading Eclipse to a new version, is EGit cloning the easiest way to continue an existing project on the same disk? Should I just copy the original directory? Should I first clone to GitHub and then clone back to the disk from there?
(2) Should I attempt to stage the uncommitted changes before cloning?
(3) Why is Git history reduced to one entry? Would it help if I let MASTER be the default branch and then what? Check out the current (rather lengthy) branch? Or something else?
(4) What should I do about .project, .settings and other configuration files? Is it okay to copy them into the new directory structure in the desired places? Or should I make note of all settings and reconstruct them in Eclipse Luna?
I was following the remarks from this SO Post to "Update" my working copy with the lastest revision checked into our SVN repo.
This made perfect sense as it is the same way I would do it using TortoisSVN. Click Update and you get most recent updated files. However, there was a file I deleted from JBoss Developer (eclipse) and was expecting that using the Update option in JBDS would restore the most recent version of that file from the SVN
However, instead it just told me a conflict existed (file deleted from working copy, but exists on repository) and did not download it like it would with TortoisSVN.
So my question is - how do I get it to update where it actually redownloads the file I deleted?
With TortoiseSVN, if you simply delete a file then it becomes "Missing". If you delete a file in Eclipse, it tells Subclipse you deleted the file so it runs svn delete. The equivalent of taking the Delete action in TortoiseSVN. When you do an update, missing files are restored in your working copy, but deleted files are not -- because you said to delete it.
You are getting something else though. In your case, there was a newer version of the file in the repository. Because it is marked deleted locally, that is a tree conflict. If you did the Delete action in TortoiseSVN you would see the same.
The tree conflict is so that you are aware that the file you deleted has been modified by someone. So maybe you want to reconsider the delete etc. The Team > Show Tree Conflicts option will show all tree conflicts and provide option to resolve it.
I know that you can track changes to renamed files from a repo to it's clone. However, I seem to have an issue when I rename a file to a file name that is already being tracked. In essence, I want to copy over a tracked file.
Files in original repo:
application.txt
special.txt
Then clone the repo, delete application.txt and rename special.txt to be application.txt
I would expect that the next time I made changes to special.txt in the original repo, the changes would carry over to application.txt. However, it doesn't. I get this message
local changed special.txt which remote deleted
use (c)hanged version or (d)eleted?
Trying this same thing out in Git seems to have the same results. Renaming a file to a brand new name has no issues while trying to rename a file that has already been 'taken' causes conflicts. Is there any way around this?
I wouldn't really call this a bug, as you have for all purposes just changed the contents of a file that mercurial is already tracking. Mercurial tracks files by file name and extension, and you could make the case that this is no different than just replacing the entire contents of the file.
I just had this problem in a real world project with Mercurial. GIT is also seeing bogus conflicts (special.txt deleted and updated).
Bazaar has proper rename support and it merges this case correctly (changes to special.txt are carried over and application.txt get updated as expected).
The problem with Bazaar though (at least for me) is that it lacks IntelliJ support. There are 2 plugins, the most recent has not been updated for 3 years, and last time i tried it was unusable with recent IntelliJ versions.
Since "bzr mv" and "bzr rename" need to be invoked by the IDE at the time of refactoring, the lack of support makes Bazaar unusable for me.
If you want IntelliJ support for this, vote here: http://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEABKL-5344