Hi Raz, When replying to emails on this list, please do not put your reply above the quoted text, and do not quote the entire message you're answering to. This makes it unnecessarily hard for other readers to understand the context of your email. Instead, please cut quoted parts that are not relevant to your reply, and insert your responses right after the points you're replying to (as I have done below). Thanks!
On Aug 15 2015, Raz <[email protected]> wrote: > On Saturday, 15 August 2015 18:17:37 UTC+1, Raz wrote: >> With the fix 2.9-2 works perfectly but even with a clean umount and then >> an upgrade to 2.13-1 (I'm running fedora 21 btw) every time i try to mount >> or fsck the filesystem I get the following traceback. >> >> Uncaught top-level exception: >> Traceback (most recent call last): >> File "/usr/bin/mount.s3ql", line 9, in <module> >> load_entry_point('s3ql==2.13', 'console_scripts', 'mount.s3ql')() >> File "/usr/lib64/python3.4/site-packages/s3ql/mount.py", line 128, in >> main >> (param, db) = get_metadata(backend, cachepath) >> File "/usr/lib64/python3.4/site-packages/s3ql/mount.py", line 391, in >> get_metadata >> param = backend.lookup('s3ql_metadata') >> File "/usr/lib64/python3.4/site-packages/s3ql/backends/comprenc.py", >> line 76, in lookup >> return self._verify_meta(key, meta_raw)[1] >> File "/usr/lib64/python3.4/site-packages/s3ql/backends/comprenc.py", >> line 140, in _verify_meta >> % (stored_key, key)) >> s3ql.backends.common.CorruptedObjectError: Object content does not match >> its key (s3ql_metadata_new vs s3ql_metadata) >> >> If I revert back to 2.9-2 it works fine. > > After some digging... the fedora project seems to have so many separate > systems unless you know it already it seems a pain to find anything... > > Direct links the the source rpms > > 2.9-2 > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/s3ql/2.9/2.fc21/src/s3ql-2.9-2.fc21.src.rpm > 2.13-1 > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/s3ql/2.13/1.fc21/src/s3ql-2.13-1.fc21.src.rpm > > Should be able to just pop these open with an archive manager they have the > tar.bz2's inside Doesn't look as if this differs from the vanilla upstream. Can you reproduce this if you create a new file system with S3QL 2.9 and then upgrade that, or does this only affect a specific, existing file system? Best, -Nikolaus -- GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.« -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "s3ql" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
