Re: [Fwd: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: tla undo - tla commit eats existing log]

[Harald Meland]

[Zenaan Harkness]

> Well, tla get works, which is very reassuring.

Note that tla get could be using a revlib instead of getting
changesets from the archive.  If this is the case for you, then "tla
get" won't necessarily give any indication of corruption, but the
archive could still be corrupt.

> Is there a problem with editing history if there is a subsequent
> changeset in my archive?

If you mean "the last revision is patch-N, and I need to edit the log
for patch-(N-x), while retaining patch(N-x+1) and onwards as they
are", then I don't see how that could be construed as anything other
than changing history -- which, as has been pointed out, you probably
don't want to do.

> Firstly, from within .../patch-43/ I edited log and checksum.

Note that the patchlog appears twice in the archive -- both as a
separate file (for easy access, e.g. "tla cat-archive-log") and as
part of the changeset tar file.

> Firstly log, to make the summary reasonable, then ran md5sum
> against log, and inserted its output into checksum (replacing
> the old checksum).
>
> Then I blew away my current two working trees and ran
> "tla get $zenat tla", "cd tla" and ran "tla logs -scD".

"tla logs" will look at the patchlogs in your working tree.  They have
been put in that tree by applying changeset tarfiles, and hence you
won't see any results of your changing the separate patchlog file in
the archive.

I think that e.g. "tla abrowse -Dsc" will look at the file you've
changed.
-- 
Harald