[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Two head revisions?

From: Jim Hyslop
Subject: Re: Two head revisions?
Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 09:14:19 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)

Hash: SHA1

Derek R. Price wrote:
> 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.  :(

Was the change recent enough that the people who committed 1.3 and the
first 1.4 may remember anything useful, such as whether either commit
was forced, whether there were any errors or warnings, and so on?

Other than what you've mentioned, was there anything else unusual about
the file? In your original message, you predicted what the file probably
looked like. How close was your prediction to the actual?

> 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?

Not I.

What is the likelihood that someone manually modified the ,v file?

Out of curiosity, does the validate_repo script pick up the original

- --
Jim Hyslop
Dreampossible: Better software. Simply.     http://www.dreampossible.ca
                 Consulting * Mentoring * Training in
    C/C++ * OOD * SW Development & Practices * Version Management
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


reply via email to

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