[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: |
Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:18:08 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060313) |
One extra piece of data: Jane's 1.4 content appears to be identical to
the recreated 1.3 content. This may or may not be a red herring, but
there is a new log message, though I have no current proof that Jane's
1.4 was not originally a force-commit without any changes.
Unfortunately, none of this gets me much closer to an answer. I
want to suspect locking issues, but if it was a locking issue, it seems
extremely unlikely that the data would line up so exactly.
Regards,
Derek
Derek R. Price wrote:
> Has anyone ever seen RCS archive corruption in the form of two head
> revisions or have any idea how it may have come about?
>
> It appears to have happened as part of a commit. The head revision was
> initially 1.4. CVS overwrote the metadata entry for 1.4 (commit time,
> author, state, branches, next), but put a second, undiffed entry for the
> head revision after the first. So, before the commit, the file probably
> looked like:
>
> RCSHEADER
>
> 1.4
> date YYYY.MM.DD.hh.mm.ss; author janedoe; state Exp;
> branches;
> next 1.3;
>
> [REVISION METADATA 1.3-1.1)
>
> desc
> @@
>
> 1.4
> log
> @what jane did
> @
> text
> @jane's content
> @
>
> 1.3
> log
> @what's gone before
> @
> text
> @a diff from jane's content
> @
>
> ...
>
>
>
> Then, after the (otherwise successful) commit:
>
> RCSHEADER
>
> 1.4
> date YYYY.MM.DD.hh.mm.ss; author joeschmoe; state Exp;
> branches;
> next 1.3;
>
> [REVISION METADATA 1.3-1.1)
>
> desc
> @@
>
> 1.4
> log
> @what jane did
> @
> text
> @jane's content
> @
>
> 1.4
> log
> @what joe did
> @
> text
> @joe's content (based on jane's content, but not the diff from it)
> @
>
> 1.3
> log
> @what's gone before
> @
> text
> @a diff from joe's content
> @
>
> ...
>
>
>
> I know for a fact that the final 1.3 text is a diff from joe's content,
> because if I reconstruct the file minus joe's head revision, I get an
> "invalid change text" error checking out 1.3, but if I reconstruct it
> minus jane's head revision, revision 1.3 will check out.
>
> Using the two head revisions, I cannot reproduce this problem via a
> simple commit.
>
> Regards,
>
> Derek
--
Derek R. Price
CVS Solutions Architect
Ximbiot <http://ximbiot.com>
v: +1 248.835.1260
f: +1 248.835.1263
<derek@ximbiot.com>