On Tuesday 27 September 2011 02:14 PM, Philip Martin wrote:
Arwin Arni<ar...@collab.net>  writes:

I've attached a shell script which will help you reproduce this
easily. Also, I'm in the process of writing a test-case for this, but
I don't know which set of tests it belongs to - authz_tests.py or
copy_tests.py or info_tests.py. Clearly, the authz subsystem is doing
what it is meant to do, but on the working copy side, 'copy' is doing
something nasty, which I believe causes 'info' to Segfault.
(gdb)
#3  0x00007ffff78cc0fe in build_info_for_node (info=0x7fffffffe040,
     db=0x651c78, local_abspath=0x6794b0 "/home/pm/sw/subversion/obj/wc/X/B",
     kind=svn_node_unknown, result_pool=0x683388, scratch_pool=0x683388)
     at ../src/subversion/libsvn_wc/info.c:267
267           tmpinfo->URL = 
svn_path_url_add_component2(tmpinfo->repos_root_URL,
(gdb) p tmpinfo->repos_root_URL
$1 = 0x0


$ sqlite3 wc/.svn/wc.db "select op_depth, local_relpath, presence, repos_id, 
repos_path from nodes"
0|A/B|absent|1|A/B
0|A|normal|1|A
0||normal|1|
1|X|normal|1|A
1|X/B|incomplete||


The same problem occurs if an wc-to-wc copy is interrupted.  I suppose
we could fix it something like:

Index: subversion/libsvn_wc/info.c
===================================================================
--- subversion/libsvn_wc/info.c (revision 1176261)
+++ subversion/libsvn_wc/info.c (working copy)
@@ -256,7 +256,9 @@
        wc_info->schedule = svn_wc_schedule_delete;
      }
    else if (status == svn_wc__db_status_not_present
-           || status == svn_wc__db_status_server_excluded)
+           || status == svn_wc__db_status_server_excluded
+           || (status == svn_wc__db_status_incomplete
+&&  !tmpinfo->repos_root_URL))
      {
        *info = NULL;
        return SVN_NO_ERROR;

or perhaps we should be setting repos_id/repos_path in the incomplete
row.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this looks like it fixes the way 'svn info' handles the incorrect node status. I think we have to fix the code at the point where this incosistency is first introduced. I agree that this would fix the segfault, but are we overlooking a more serious problem with the way 'svn cp'handles the server-excluded nodes? I haven't grokked the relevant code yet, and so I'm not in a position to comment on specifics.

Regards,
Arwin Arni

Reply via email to