Re: [Monotone-devel] Changes in nvm.basic_io.inventory

[Thomas Keller]

Stephen Leake schrieb:
> > $ mtn automate inventory newdir
> >      path "newdir"
> > old_type "directory"
> > new_type "directory"
> >   fs_type "directory"
> >    status "known"
> >
> >      path "newdir/foooo"
> > new_type "file"
> >   fs_type "file"
> >    status "added" "known"
>
> I'm not sure what the problem is here. Are you saying that 'newdir' is
> in fact a "new directory", and all files in it should be listed as
> "unknown"?

If you compare that output to the former, you see that newdir/foooo is 
recognized as added, obviously it should have been recognized as "renamed".


> > All this is actually not a bug in the recently committed code, but
> > rather a bug in the restrictions code.
>
> Ok. We need to add tests for these cases.

No, we should rather fix that bug =) I asked Derek Scherger about it 
(because its beyond my knowledge), but he's a bit out of time. The 
discussion can be read here [0].

> > b) Currently, my new code seems to produce a bit irritating output
> > when it comes to cyclic renames:
> >
> >      path "blubba"
> > old_type "file"
> > new_path "foooo"
> > new_type "file"
> > old_path "foooo"
> >   fs_type "file"
> >    status "renamed" "known"
> >
> >      path "foooo"
> > old_type "file"
> > new_path "blubba"
> > new_type "file"
> > old_path "blubba"
> >   fs_type "file"
> >    status "renamed" "known"
> >
> >
> > Here, blubba and foooo are swapped, but you can't easily determine
> > that from scanning over it, because both paths, old_path and new_path,
> > are equal for each item, but of course point to the correct nodes for
> > the respective roster.
>
> I don't understand why the old_path for "blubba" is not "fooo", and
> vice-versa. 

If you look at the output it actually is:

path "blubba"
[...]
old_path "foooo"

But yes, this is confusing. This is because inventory just outputs two 
stanzas per rename action here instead of four. Sometimes I stare at it 
for minutes and say "wait, its wrong", but then, a bit later I could 
persuade myself that it is correct =)

> This also needs a test case. What is the sequence of commands for this?

Given the fact you have two files foo and bar, which should be swapped:

$ mtn rename foo tmp
$ mtn rename bar foo
$ mtn rename tmp bar

> Actually, I'm looking for "no-ignored" and "no-unchanged".
>
> "no-unknown" might also be desirable in some situations.
>
> Looking thru the code briefly, it seems options are declared in
> options_list.hh.
>
> We could use the existing "brief" to mean "no-ignored" and
> "no-unchanged". 

Derek brought up the following: Lets have unknown and ignored files 
excluded by default and add two options, --(include-|show-|)unknown and 
--(include-|show-|)ignored, to include them. While I'm absolutely not 
biased about what this command should output by default, I'd vote 
against --brief, because I think this option name is a bit too vague.

> We also need:
>
> d) Updated tests/automate_inventory
>
> I have not made much progress on this.

Before the format isn't set in stone, there is no need to rush here.

Thomas.


[0] 
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/monotone?date=2007-05-03,Thu&sel=38#l77

--
ICQ: 85945241 | SIP: 1-747-027-0392 | http://www.thomaskeller.biz
> Guitone, a frontend for monotone: http://guitone.thomaskeller.biz
> Music lyrics and more: http://musicmademe.com