Did you restart the web server after the upgrade? If not, it could just be
that you have the old modules still loaded in memory in your server.

Christian

-- 
Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com


On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:08 PM, sr55 <sra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Decided to do a new rb-site install, then switch the config to point
> at the old database. Seems to be a easy work-around for dodgy
> upgrades.
>
> Thanks, and thanks for the great tool.
>
> Scott
>
> On May 20, 8:57 pm, sr55 <sra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just archived the old RB egg file in /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages
> > to test the theory. Turns out something somewhere is still reverencing
> > it
> >
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> >
> >   File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/Django-1.2.5-py2.5.egg/django/
> > core/handlers/base.py", line 106, in get_response
> >     response = middleware_method(request, e)
> >
> >   File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/Djblets-0.6.7-py2.5.egg/
> > djblets/log/middleware.py", line 221, in process_exception
> >     exception, exc_info=1)
> >
> >   File "/usr/lib/python2.5/logging/__init__.py", line 1294, in error
> >     apply(root.error, (msg,)+args, kwargs)
> >
> >   File "/usr/lib/python2.5/logging/__init__.py", line 1015, in error
> >     apply(self._log, (ERROR, msg, args), kwargs)
> >
> >   File "/usr/lib/python2.5/logging/__init__.py", line 1101, in _log
> >     self.handle(record)
> >
> >   File "/usr/lib/python2.5/logging/__init__.py", line 1111, in handle
> >     self.callHandlers(record)
> >
> >   File "/usr/lib/python2.5/logging/__init__.py", line 1148, in
> > callHandlers
> >     hdlr.handle(record)
> >
> >   File "/usr/lib/python2.5/logging/__init__.py", line 655, in handle
> >     self.emit(record)
> >
> >   File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/Djblets-0.6.7-py2.5.egg/
> > djblets/log/handlers.py", line 80, in emit
> >     self.stream.flush()
> >
> > ValueError: I/O operation on closed file
> >
> > On May 20, 8:45 pm, sr55 <sra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hmm, Looking in the Site folder, there are sym-links to the new beta 2
> > > so maybe there is some caching going on.
> > > Would have thought restarting memcahced and lighttpd would have sorted
> > > that.
> >
> > > On May 20, 8:36 pm, sr55 <sra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >https://reviews.handbrake.fr/dashboard/
> >
> > > > Seems it's still Beta 1. The bug on the user pages e.g. "https://
> > > > reviews.handbrake.fr/users/davidfstr/" is still there which I
> believe
> > > > you fixed.
> >
> > > > On May 20, 8:16 pm, Christian Hammond <chip...@chipx86.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > This is just the search index setting?
> >
> > > > > We don't update that. In fact, it shouldn't be pointing inside the
> > > > > ReviewBoard directory at all. It looks like your upgrade was
> successful. I'd
> > > > > just change the search index setting to point to some place inside
> your side
> > > > > directory (in data/).
> >
> > > > > Christian
> >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> > > > > Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org
> > > > > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
> >
> > > > > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:12 PM, sr55 <sra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Trying to upgrade our reviewboard to beta 2. Problem is, the
> rb-site
> > > > > > tool seems to be failing. I've done the following:
> >
> > > > > > /www/Reviews% sudo easy_install -f
> > > > > >http://downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/ReviewBoard/1.6/
> > > > > > -U <
> http://downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/ReviewBoard/1.6/%0A-U
> >ReviewBoard
> > > > > > Searching for ReviewBoard
> > > > > > Readinghttp://
> downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/ReviewBoard/1.6/
> > > > > > Readinghttp://pypi.python.org/simple/ReviewBoard/
> > > > > > Readinghttp://www.review-board.org/
> > > > > > Readinghttp://
> downloads.review-board.org/releases/ReviewBoard/1.0/
> > > > > > Readinghttp://
> downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/ReviewBoard/1.5/
> > > > > > Readinghttp://downloads.review-board.org/releases/
> > > > > > Best match: ReviewBoard 1.6beta2.1
> > > > > > Processing ReviewBoard-1.6beta2.1-py2.5.egg
> > > > > > ReviewBoard 1.6beta2.1 is already the active version in easy-
> > > > > > install.pth
> > > > > > Installing rb-site script to /usr/bin
> > > > > > Installing rbssh script to /usr/bin
> >
> > > > > > Using /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/ReviewBoard-1.6beta2.1-
> > > > > > py2.5.egg
> > > > > > Readinghttp://downloads.reviewboard.org/mirror/
> > > > > > Processing dependencies for ReviewBoard
> > > > > > Finished processing dependencies for ReviewBoard
> >
> > > > > > -----------------------------------
> >
> > > > > > /www/Reviews% sudo rb-site upgrade .
> > > > > > Rebuilding directory structure
> > > > > > Updating database. This may take a while.
> > > > > > No fixtures found.
> > > > > >
> /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/pycrypto-2.3-py2.5-linux-i686.egg/
> > > > > > Crypto/Util/randpool.py:40: RandomPool_DeprecationWarning: This
> > > > > > application uses RandomPool, which is BROKEN in older releases.
>  See
> > > > > >http://www.pycrypto.org/randpool-broken
> > > > > >  RandomPool_DeprecationWarning)
> > > > > > No evolution required.
> > > > > > Upgrade complete.
> >
> > > > > > --------------------------------------
> >
> > > > > > /www/Reviews% rb-site manage . evolve -- --hint
> > > > > > No evolution required.
> >
> > > > > > ----------------------------
> >
> > > > > > Restart Lightttpd, and the site still shows 1.6 Beta 1
> >
> > > > > > Running on Debian 5 with Python 2.5
> >
> > > > > > I noticed in the site configurations, it says beta 2, but in the
> > > > > > Setting value it still shows "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/
> > > > > > ReviewBoard-1.6beta1-py2.5.egg/reviewboard/search-index"
> >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at
> > > > > >http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/
> > > > > > Happy user? Let us know athttp://www.reviewboard.org/users/
> > > > > > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
>
> --
> Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at
> http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/
> Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
>

-- 
Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at 
http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/
Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en

Reply via email to