-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Stephanie,
> Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 12:34:06 +0200 > From: Stephanie Seibt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (Windows/20060308) > To: "Mark D. Baushke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Major change in conflict handling between 1.12.9 and 1.12.13? > X-SBScore: 0 (Spam Threshold: 20) (Block Threshold: 5) > > Hi Mark, > > thanks for your efforts. > On my windows system I'm not able to patch my clients, the compilation > of the sources didn't work ;-( > I only have binaries. I understand. FWIW binary/feature/x86-woe/cvs-1-12-13a.zip has been uploaded to the area on http://download.savannah.gnu.org/releases/cvs/ which has a separate important windows client fix. > Now I've tested with the same file as before on an actual gentoo-linux. Ahhh... now, on gentoo-linux I KNOW you can fetch a copy of the cvs-1.12.13 sources and apply the patch of my last e-mail to see if it helps you or not. > > Environment like before: Debian server cvs-1.12.9 (Debian-patch) with > pserver access. > > Steps 1) to 4) with client cvs-1.12.12 on the gentoo machine > > The content of the Entries file is the same as before and persists at > different cvs -n update calls. > I've tried the updates after my join with three clients: > cvs-1.11.20 and cvs-1.12.12 shows the conflict, cvs-1.12.13 does not. > > Unfortunately I'm not able to send the file,v to you, because it's not > my private software. You may wish to try using the CVS_CLIENT_LOG environment variable as Jim suggested. However, it might expose parts of your file, so please do look at the ${CVS_CLIENT_LOG}.in and ${CVS_CLIENT_LOG}.out files closely before you just send them along to us. I am also interested to know the offset in bytes of the conflict markers into the file. I am expecting that the ${CVS_CLIENT_LOG}.in file will contain lines like this: Entry /file/1.5/+=// Unchanged file1 update And that the ${CVS_CLIENT_LOG}.out file will contain lines like this: first-dir/ MT text C MT fname file MT newline error if everything is working correctly. The "+=" information in the date field is VERY important. -- Mark > > Cheers, Stephanie > > > Mark D. Baushke schrieb: > > Hi Stephanie, > > The information you are producing for me is not very helpful. :-( > > I have moved this discussion to the bug-cvs mailing list. For folks > > just > > joining this problem, look on the [email protected] list archives. > > Grasping at straws, the only change I see that might remotely have > > caused a change in behavior between cvs 1.12.9 and 1.12.13 is this one: > > 2005-09-22 Derek Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * classify.c (Classify_File): Consolidate redundant > > conditionals. > > Does the patch below fix your problem? (Sadly, this means you will > > need > > to (re)build CVS. If you are not able to build from the cvs 1.12.13a > > sources, this puts us in a bit of an impass as I have no windows boxes > > of any kind in my world...) If you are able to reproduce the problem on > > a Debian system, then things might be easier for you to track down. > > -- Mark > > --- cvs-1.12.13/src/classify.c.orig 2005-09-22 20:37:42.000000000 > > -0700 > > +++ cvs-1.12.13/src/classify.c 2006-06-02 02:05:02.103376910 -0700 > > @@ -236,8 +236,19 @@ Classify_File (struct file_info *finfo, > > finfo->fullname); > > ret = T_REMOVE_ENTRY; > > } > > - else if (strcmp (vers->ts_user, vers->ts_rcs) > > - && No_Difference (finfo, vers)) > > + else if (strcmp (vers->ts_user, vers->ts_rcs) == 0) > > + { > > + > > + /* > > + * The user file is still unmodified, so just remove it from > > + * the entry list > > + */ > > + if (!really_quiet) > > + error (0, 0, "`%s' is no longer in the repository", > > + finfo->fullname); > > + ret = T_REMOVE_ENTRY; > > + } > > + else if (No_Difference (finfo, vers)) > > { > > /* they are different -> conflict */ > > if (!really_quiet) > > @@ -249,13 +260,10 @@ Classify_File (struct file_info *finfo, > > } > > else > > { > > - > > - /* > > - * The user file is still unmodified, so just remove it from > > - * the entry list > > - */ > > + /* they weren't really different */ > > if (!really_quiet) > > - error (0, 0, "`%s' is no longer in the repository", > > + error (0, 0, > > + "warning: `%s' is not (any longer) pertinent", > > finfo->fullname); > > ret = T_REMOVE_ENTRY; > > } > > @@ -284,9 +292,7 @@ Classify_File (struct file_info *finfo, > > error (0, 0, "warning: `%s' was lost", finfo->fullname); > > ret = T_CHECKOUT; > > } > > - else if (!strcmp (vers->ts_user, > > - vers->ts_conflict > > - ? vers->ts_conflict : vers->ts_rcs)) > > + else if (strcmp (vers->ts_user, vers->ts_rcs) == 0) > > { > > /* > > @@ -300,8 +306,6 @@ Classify_File (struct file_info *finfo, > > if (vers->entdata->options && > > strcmp (vers->entdata->options, vers->options) != 0) > > ret = T_CHECKOUT; > > - else if (vers->ts_conflict) > > - ret = T_CONFLICT; > > else > > { > > sticky_ck (finfo, aflag, vers); > > ------- original message ------- > > Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 10:44:55 +0200 > > From: Stephanie Seibt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Mark D. Baushke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Major change in conflict handling between 1.12.9 and 1.12.13? > > Hi Mark, > > Mark D. Baushke schrieb: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> Stephanie Seibt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >>> here is my test case: > >>> > >>> 1) cvs update -j last_join_tag -j BRANCHNAME >logfile 2>&1 > >>> 2) content of logfile: > >>> RCS file: /cvs-repository/path_to_file/file,v > >>> retrieving revision 1.2 > >>> retrieving revision 1.2.10.1 > >>> Merging differences between 1.2 and 1.2.10.1 into file > >>> rcsmerge: warning: conflicts during merge > >> As I do not actually have your file,v available as a test case, this > >> does not help very much. > >> > > file revision 1.2 > > snip: > > my @r = (q$Revision: 1.2 $ =~ /\d+/g); > > file revision 1.2.10 > > snip: > > my @r = (q$Revision: 1.2.10.1 $ =~ /\d+/g); > > file after join: > > <<<<<<< file > > my @r = (q$Revision: 1.5 $ =~ /\d+/g); > > ======= > > my @r = (q$Revision: 1.2.10.1 $ =~ /\d+/g); > >>>>>>>> 1.2.10.1 > > > >>> 3) content of CVS/Entries: > >>> /file/1.5/Result of merge+Fri Jun 2 08:02:40 2006// > >>> 4) cvs -n update file shows nothing (is cvs-1.12.13 for Windows) > >> And is the contents of the CVS/Entries file unchanged after this > >> step #4 operation? > >> > > the content is unchanged > > > >>> 5) cvs-1.11.17 -n update shows (also Windows client) > >>> C file > >> What dose 'cvs-1.12.13 version' output? (i.e., what is the the server > >> revision of CVS)? It would also be good to know the server hardware and > >> operating system type and any special configurations that went into the > >> server versio n of cvs. > >> Are you able to give me any further details about the configuration > >> of > >> the cvs 1.12.13 you are using? > >> > > I thought I did it in my first mail > > Environment: remote server cvs-1.12.9 (Debian-patch, should be equal > > to cvs-1.12.13) > > pserver access > > client cvs-1.12.13 for Windows (downloaded from gnu.org) > > output of cvs-1.12.13 version is > > Client: Concurrent Versions System (CVS) 1.12.13 (client) > > Server: Concurrent Versions System (CVS) 1.12.9 (client/server) > > the server is Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 > > > >>> Hope this helps, Stephanie > >> Sadly, not yet. Until an unless I can understand what is happening, > >> I am > >> not able to fix it. > >> -- Mark > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) > >> iD8DBQFEf/UMCg7APGsDnFERAt6zAJ46fX+Jqrrpkz/iyeUHBCVp5LjCigCffM8q > >> IqPCv3BFVDlTQD1tIXwxIhQ= > >> =Tkhg > >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >> > > Greetings, Stephanie > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEgGFsCg7APGsDnFERApeRAKCJ6lafWmyzfH2qOdgD/oe+63i86gCgzB5e bPKOEi2KnmZXpQ9HQ/e+PIU= =ezWc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Bug-cvs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs
