Maciej Bliziński <[email protected]> writes: > On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 12:24:40PM +0200, Peter FELECAN wrote: >> Maciej Bliziński <[email protected]> writes: >> (...) >> >> sqlobject.dberrors.OperationalError: Row size too large. The >> > maximum row size for the used table type, not counting BLOBs, is >> > 65535. You have to change some columns to TEXT or BLOBs >> > >> > Hm. This happens when you try to initialize the database and create the >> > tables, not when you try to insert any data. >> > >> > Is this the old code or the new code? >> > >> > If it's the new code, then it's a bug. But I haven't been able to >> > reproduce it. >> > >> > If it's the old code, then it's what I mentioned earlier: It's not the >> > instructions we don't have, it's the code we don't have. >> >> revision 22118. consequently what I imagine you call "new code". > > No, the new code is still in git, on github. If it's from subversion, > it's the old code.
Good. I think that at this point we must clarify things: 1. I volunteer to verify the manual in what concerns the build-farm setup. 2. You write and consolidate the pieces for a draft 3. I'm testing and adapting the manual and we arrive at a point where the procedure doesn't work. 4. You explicitly write about .buildsys/v2 in mgar in the draft as in our exchanges 5. Now you are writing about a "new" code which is in git. This is quite confusing. I wonder what is the reason. Also, when asking you if it's a good idea to package the required tool you say: 1. That using "svn up" is not a really difficult 2. But, later, you say that it's in a git repository 3. You give a list long as a fasting day for why packaging the checkpg related tool is not a good idea This is also very confusing. Can you, please, explain your standpoint? Thank you in advance -- Peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
