On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 17:00:14 +0000, Ashley Moran wrote: > One of my clients stumbled across a very specific set of operations that > cause data loss.
Sorry to hear that. When you say data loss, are you referring to stuff in his/her working directory that was lost? If not, you can recover the original data by unpulling one of the conflicting patches > Fortunately it was really minor (a few lines), but very > suprising behaviour. It happens when pulling a patch that renames a file > AND replaces a token with the token chars '[%r/]'. Darcs says there is a > conflict, but does not create a backup file with the existing data. > Is this is a bug, or are we abusing `darcs replace`? (Or both?) So to make sure I'm on the same page: are you referring specifically to the failure to back up a file in the presence of a conflict? Please submit a report to [email protected], and also create a test case for our bugs/ directory and darcs send it (since you *almost* have one! :-D). One thing that may be worth checking is if the use of darcs replace is a red herring, and if a mv conflict suffices to trigger this situation, or perhaps a mv with any other sort of conflict. Thanks, -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
pgp4Y3Ksi1CDQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
