Cool. Thanks for the post-mortem, Dave. There's a reason the release procedure is so long. Every time I make a mistake, I add something to it. ;)
On 4 April 2013 19:18, Dave Cottlehuber <[email protected]> wrote: > OK I finally figured out what happened, and I'm feeling very embarrassed by > it. Sorry everybody for the inconvenience. > > I have some automated build tasks running as a service and wasn't aware > they were still running. As a result depending on when I ran the manual > builds, I am either missing pieces (as it removes files for the background > build), or has extra components mixed in from a build on some new git > commit. The bundle step takes place after the in-build tree `make check` > has run, so I'll need to extend the bundling step for some sanity checks > next time. The basic "verify install" tests don't check enough to pick up > this sort of screw-up. > > The safest thing in the circumstances is to rebuild all the builds (done), > re-test (done), get them checked by a few other folk first, and on Monday > let you all know when the new binaries are OK and have hit the mirrors. > > If you need a version ASAP (e.g. you are hitting the rewriter bug which was > one of the main reasons for the 1.2.2 point release) please reply offline > and I can get you started sooner, or just follow the thread on dev@. > > Again, my sincere apologies. > Dave > > > > On 4 April 2013 10:04, Dave Cottlehuber <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Marten, > > > > I need to look into this. I rebuilt the 1.2.2 R14B04 yesterday after Alex > > found a bug, I am beginning to think that somewhere I've uploaded broken > > snapshot binaries instead of working ones :-/. > > > > In future I'll use git sha names for pre-release binaries, and then > rename > > them once we have official tags, this will ensure I'm not confused when > we > > run multiple release streams in parallel. > > > > My sincerest apologies all for the inconvenience & the muck-up. > > > > A+ > > Dave > > > > > > On 4 April 2013 09:30, Marten Feldtmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I deinstalled CouchDB, installed it again with the offical download for > >> windows (CouchDB 1.2.2, Erlang 15) and got the same errors and names. > >> > >> I deinstalled CouchDB again and installed 1.2.2 (Erlang 14) and this > >> database started (as a service) but did not answer any requests. > >> > >> I deinstalled CouchDB again and installed 1.2.1 and everything was ok > >> again. > >> > >> Marten > >> > >> > >> > >> On 04.04.2013 09:20, Nick North wrote: > >> > >>> I've had errors in the past installing new Windows CouchDb releases > over > >>> old ones. It works better to back up your databases and config, > uninstall > >>> the old version, install the new one, and restore the databases and > >>> config. > >>> But the weird naming thing suggests something else might be going on in > >>> your case as well. > >>> > >> > > > -- NS
