Hi Nate

Yes, upgrading one of our old servers with "hg pull -u -r 63bc46cc73b7" and downloading a new clone with "hg clone http://www.bx.psu.edu/hg/galaxy galaxy-dist", does not result in the same changeset number (ie '6528')


Thank you very much
Hans



On 01/20/2012 09:04 AM, Hans-Rudolf Hotz wrote:
Hi Nate

Thank you very much for your e-mail

I am still testing and working on the last distribution, hopefully going
live this Sunday. But I will look into downloading and upgrading (one of
our dev servers) to the new distribution next week.

Regards, Hans

On 01/19/2012 07:39 PM, Nate Coraor wrote:
Hi Hans,

We're releasing a distribution today. If this is still the case with
that distribution, let me know. There were branches that weren't
showing up under newer versions of Mercurial. Hopefully this is all
resolved in the latest.

--nate

On Jan 17, 2012, at 4:11 AM, Hans-Rudolf Hotz wrote:

Hi

I am in the process of upgrading all our Galaxy servers to the
current changeset ("b258de1e6cea", Nov. 18) and I have noticed an
inconsistency:

If I upgrade one of our old servers (which was on "720455407d1c",
June 23) with 'hg pull -u -r b258de1e6cea' I get the following:


haruhotz@silicon: hg heads
changeset: 6297:b258de1e6cea
tag: tip
user: jeremy goecks<jeremy.goe...@emory.edu>
date: Thu Nov 17 15:08:49 2011 -0500
summary: Pack js scripts.

haruhotz@silicon:



If I create a new installation with
'hg clone http://www.bx.psu.edu/hg/galaxy galaxy-dist' I get the
following:



haruhotz@silicon: hg heads
changeset: 6298:b258de1e6cea
tag: tip
user: jeremy goecks<jeremy.goe...@emory.edu>
date: Thu Nov 17 15:08:49 2011 -0500
summary: Pack js scripts.

changeset: 5832:70b8039a2eef
branch: feature/ws
parent: 5826:6206a27bd2ae
user: Nate Coraor<n...@bx.psu.edu>
date: Wed Jul 27 10:48:03 2011 -0400
summary: Closed the feature/ws branch, changes from this branch were
merged in 5827:f3a1086fac91.

haruhotz@silicon:



I am not worry about the merged branched, I am just a little bit
surprised about the differences:

"6298:b258de1e6cea" versus "6297:b258de1e6cea"


Can anybody with more mercurial experience enlighten me what went
wrong? and even better tell me that there is nothing to worry about...


Regards, Hans



___________________________________________________________
Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

http://lists.bx.psu.edu/

___________________________________________________________
Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

 http://lists.bx.psu.edu/

Reply via email to