Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have a subversion externals entry in a library folder which looks like this:

Z https://svn/Z/trunk/library/Z

Fetching external item into '/home/releases/50/library/Z' 
svn: OPTIONS of 'http://svn/repo/trunk/library/Z': could not connect to server (http://svn)

The externals URL was the same, but over the HTTP protocol. Having changed the externals to point to the HTTPS, I can't figure out why subversion is still trying to use the old URL.

Does subversion cache the externals path, and if so how can I clear this? If not, what else could be causing this?

I can check out from the correct (HTTPS) URL fine from the server.

NOTE: svn is an entry in the server's local hosts file, pointing to our subversion server's IP.

share|improve this question

Change into /home/releases/50/library/Z and run svn info. I suspect you will find that it is still reporting the old repository root http://svn/repo/.

I believe you have two options. Just delete Z and do an svn update, which will retrieve a new copy using the updated externals. This may be the easiest if you don't have any un-versioned and un-committed stuff in that directory.

Or change into the directory and perform a relocate.

share|improve this answer
Thanks for your answer. I don't actually have a working copy, as the checkout fails - that's the most frustrating thing! – David Caunt Jan 13 '11 at 10:33
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Hopefully this answer will help someone else.

I had actually changed the externals in the root of my project, where an entry existed as follows:

library/Z [url]

and added the new one in the externals for library.

Unfortunately I hadn't commit the very root of the project somehow and this externals entry had priority over the one in the library folder.

share|improve this answer
Ah, thats weird. Do you really need it defined in two locations? You might save yourself some confusion in the future if you only have it defined in one place. – Zoredache Jan 13 '11 at 17:49
No, I just need it defined in one place. My mistake was in not actually committing the externals change in the very root. You are right though, it was very confusing! – David Caunt Jan 16 '11 at 0:30

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.