On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Andres Perera wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Philip Guenther wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Marco Pfatschbacher wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:19:45PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Interesting. Can we take bath approaches?
>>>
>>>
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Marco Pfatschbacher wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:19:45PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>>> Interesting. Can we take bath approaches?
>>
>> I don't see why we should not.
>>
>>> Is there a reason to no
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Philip Guenther wrote:
>>> > /* Do not exit before child to ensure data integrity */
>>> > - if (zpid > 0)
>>> > + if (zpid > 0) {
>>> > waitpid(zpid, &status, 0);
>>> > + if (WIFEXITED(status) && WEXITSTATUS(status))
>>> > +
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Marco Pfatschbacher wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:19:45PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>> Interesting. Can we take bath approaches?
>
> I don't see why we should not.
>
>> Is there a reason to not expose either error?
>
> I thought it might break some legacy
On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:19:45PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Interesting. Can we take bath approaches?
I don't see why we should not.
> Is there a reason to not expose either error?
I thought it might break some legacy stuff regarding
tapes and such. But since no one spoke up...
OK?
> >
Hello,
OpenCVS fails to retrieve deltas at ends of revision chains. Because of
this, a checkout of revision 1.1 or the last revision of a branch tends
to give wrong data or crash the program. This issue has been around
several years, and many have reported it in the mailing lists.
The following p
