[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Two head revisions?

From: Derek R. Price
Subject: Re: Two head revisions?
Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 02:17:57 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20060308)

Hash: SHA1

Todd Denniston wrote:
> If it IS an NFS netapp, then one sub question to ask is CAN any
> other machines besides the main CVS machine mount that directory
> structure? Granted from what I recall of the NFS mungings of the
> past, having it survive in as good a shape as you have seems
> strange.

Turns out the repo is on a SAN, but only the CVS server has that
particular directory mounted read-write and I'm assured that SAN
storage looks much more like a local disk to the OS than NFS and that
I should trust it.  Has anyone had any problems with repos on SANs?

I also got a copy of the archive prior to the second 1.4 commit.  Sure
enough, it had a header with "head: 1.3", no 1.4 metadata, but had a
1.4 change text.  All 3.5 original revisions were created on the same
day, so I can't pull anything older from storage.  :(

Checking out revision 1.2 in the raw retrieved archive produced an
error, but I reconstructed and repeated the four commits without
reproducing the corruption, which didn't surprise me.

Attempting to commit a second 1.4 revision to the retrieved archive
with CVS does produce the corrupted file I originally received, with
two 1.4 change texts, but now I need to explain the original
corruption.  Has anyone seen anything like the corruption in the
retrieved archive?



- --
Derek R. Price
CVS Solutions Architect
Get CVS support at Ximbiot <http://ximbiot.com>!
v: +1 248.835.1260
f: +1 248.835.1263
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]