Re: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho uld have !

[Eric Siegerman]

On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 06:35:35PM +0200, Reinstein, Shlomo wrote:
> This would be fine if CVS had consistent behavior when using a local
> repository and when using client/server. Until a short time ago, we used to
> work with a local repository (on a network drive), and we got used to that
> behavior. Our set of scripts around CVS rely on this behavior.

It's supposed to work as you expect, locally and client/server
both.  I'm very surprised by the behaviour you saw -- so
surprised that I can't help suspecting that something else was
going on, since I don't believe I've ever seen an up-to-date
check pass when it shouldn't.

> Technical details:
>   - User A works on Linux, using CVS client & server version
>     1.10.8.
>   - User B works on Windows 2000, using CVS client 1.10.7 and
>     server 1.10.8
>     (both users using the same CVS server machine, same version of CVS on both
>     machines)

Umm, those are pretty old!  May I suggest upgrading to 1.11.5?
No guarantee that it'll help, but it couldn't hurt.

>   - The repository is on NFS.

You probably know which red flag that's raising for me :-)  But
from what you say above, it sounds as though only the one
CVS-server Linux box is accessing the repo directly (i.e. it's
the only NFS client to touch it).  If that's correct, it makes
things less worrisome -- but I suppose there still might be
interoperability problems between the Linux NFS client and your
NFS server if it's on a different platform.

--

|  | /\
|-_|/  >   Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont.        address@hidden
|  |  /
A distributed system is one on which I cannot get any work done,
because a machine I have never heard of has crashed.
        - Leslie Lamport