Re: [Gnu-arch-users] question about greedy library and history

[James Blackwell]

In lists.arch.users, you wrote:
> Johannes Berg wrote:
>
>>>1.3 doesn't have any cached revisions, so it's necessary to use 1.2.
>>>1.2 has a cacherev at base-0, so 1.1 isn't needed.
>> 
>> 
>> 1.3 does have a cacherev at base-0
>
> Oh, odd.  The mirror at sourcecontrol doesn't have it.

There's a race with the cached revision code. It goes something like
this: between when you committed patch-2 and cachreved it, the
supermirror archived patch-2. When patch-3 comes along, the mirror never
has any idea to look in patch-2 (its much too expensive to check). 

This problem is excaberrated by some poorly set up hook scripts out
there that push an archive-mirror whenever a tagging operation happens
(In my view, an archive-mirror should only happen after something has
been commited).

Once a cached revision has been missed, the only official way to fix it
is to wipe the archive and remirror. Unofficially, at least for unsigned
archives, if you have physical access to the mirror, you can copy the
cachedrev in.

There's a possible fix for this, but when I ran it across the list it
didn't receive a favorable response. Essentially, the idea was to add an
optional file to patch dir that would list all cachedrevs that had been
added since the previous commit.

-- 
James Blackwell          Please do not send me carbon copies of mailing
Smile more!              list posts. Such mail is unsolicited. Thank you!

GnuPG (ID 06357400) AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D  247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400