Problems with bzr.dev tonight

Robert Collins robertc at robertcollins.net
Tue Oct 16 05:42:40 BST 2007


On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 14:36 +1000, Ian Clatworthy wrote:
> Robert Collins wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 12:35 +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
> >> Talking this over Ian and I came up with a hypothesis: this happened
> >> when the packs format changed from being annotated to unannotated,
> >> without a synchronized bump of its version string.  (If that did not
> >> occur we need a new hypothesis. ;-)
> > 
> > You need a new hypothesis I think, as the problem revno has not been
> > propogated to bzr.dev from anywhere other than my integration knits
> > repo, and I independently converted each knit repo atomically.
> 
> I'll try and state the hypothesis another way. Here's my setup:
> 
> bzr/
>     .bzr/ (shared repo)
>     bzr.dev/ (trunk)
>     heaps of other branches
>     robertc.repository/ (from
> http://people.ubuntu.com/%7Erobertc/baz2.0/repository/)
> 
> Going into robertc.repository and typing "./bzr pull", as I did
> yesterday afternoon, might have broken the subsequent "./bzr pull" in
> bzr.dev as they share a repository.

It might have I guess

> If I go into the robertc.repository branch and type ./bzr info -v,
> here's what I get:

> bzr: ERROR: bzrlib.errors.KnitCorrupt: Knit <bzrlib.knit._KnitAccess
> object at 0x84969ac> corrupt: incorrect number of lines 8 != 1 for
> version {robertc at robertcollins.net-20070912050636-c6fu3lybn1tbftk5}
...
> I can't remember back that far as it was before my holidays. :-) Should
> I be worried at all above the "Unbreak weaves" change or is that a red
> herring? Perhaps other people ran into a the same problem weeks ago
> (Jelmer suggested as much) and I'm only just seeing it now because I did
> "./bzr pull" in my robertc.repository branch then?

Ok, if we rephrase the hypothesis as:

'bzr.dev is not corrupt; you and Martin have got corrupt data due to not
upgrading your copies of packs in sync with the announce mails about it,
resulting in blind copies of unannotated data into annotated packs' then
that does sound more feasible, and suggests the damage is localised to
you two.

-Rob
-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20071016/879940c5/attachment.pgp 


More information about the bazaar mailing list