This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] FW: problem for mecurial 0.6c

To: "xen-devel" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] FW: problem for mecurial 0.6c
From: "Ling, Xiaofeng" <xiaofeng.ling@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:47:08 +0800
Delivery-date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 00:45:20 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcWnTvSHSQL+tcYwTOCytyymlpJNggALPh8w
Thread-topic: problem for mecurial 0.6c
If you are using mecurial 0.6c, and try to clone a old xen repository directory,
you may need this.

Matt Mackall <mailto:mpm@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> [please forward this on to the Xen list so folks know what's up.]
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 04:55:36PM +0100, James Bulpin wrote:
>> I'm responsible for the xenbits.xensource.com Xen repository server
>> Xiaofeng Ling mentions in the post. We upgraded the server to 0.6c
>> yesterday. A number of people have reported problems with cloning
>> using 0.6b and 0.6c clients (0.5b seems to work fine). Trying it
>> myself I see the same error as the poster using either 0.6b or 0.6c
>> as the client. For now I've backed off the server to 0.6b.
>> Additionally I now see errors with hg verify that I've not seen
>> before; 0.6b does not show them, 0.6c does. This is the case for the
>> current repo and for historical filesystem level snapshots going back
>> to the end of June when we first converted to mercurial.
>> Are these two issues linked? I'm wondering is some historical problem
>> in our repository is triggering the clone failure.
> Sorry about this, I overlooked this when I was writing the release
> notes. It's been in tip for a couple weeks: 
> http://www.selenic.com/hg/?cmd=changeset;node=fbe964ae7325d1a0ee2d35682f33337b17eeec32
> What's happening is:
>> node 560d1497c659914905e046bade1c570e9b477396 in manifests not in
>> tools/examples/init.d/xend
> This filename contains a directory ending with .d. If we were to add
> a file called tools/examples/init to the repo, it would be stored as
> .hg/tools/examples/init.[di] and collide with your directory.  
> To avoid this problem, we're now escaping such directory names by
> adding .hg. So the above becomes tools/examples/init.d.hg/xend. 
> Unfortunately Mercurial doesn't automatically fix up stuff in the old
> style - I naively expected that no one would yet have such
> directories, ignoring the fairly common practice of naming
> directories of config exploded config files that way.   
> But dealing with it is pretty easy, you just need to rename the
> problematic directories. Something like this should do the trick: 
>  find .hg -type d -name "*.[di]" -exec echo mv {} {}.hg ";"
> Run this at the top of your working dir. Take out the 'echo' once
> you've confirmed it's finding the right files. 
> Also note that 0.6c and 0.6b clients should be perfectly compatible
> over the wire, so long as each side has the appropriate directory
> naming.  
> But if you use 0.6c to pull into a repo created by 0.6b with changes
> that touch files in an affected directory, you're likely to have
> strange behavior.  

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [Xen-devel] FW: problem for mecurial 0.6c, Ling, Xiaofeng <=