Re: why the change in the checksums

solo turn <soloturn99@yahoo.com> writes:
> does somebody know why exactly the "checksumming, more checksumming"
> was introduced?

Yep -- to detect data corruption.

> and what are the actions on the checksumming failures?

It depends on the circumstances. If everything's going right, you
shouldn't get a checksum failure. If something went wrong, then the
action to take depends on what exactly went wrong.

> we are a little stuck currently cause we don't know if we should
> upgrade from 16.0 and what happens then ....

You should upgrade both client and server to 0.17.1, or to HEAD, imho.
If you follow the checksum threads, most of the failures are due to
the win-tests.py debacle (which was a case of checksums correctly
detecting badness, i.e., behaving as designed), and one of them is
still unexplained (Lele Gaifax's), but I can't reproduce it with
0.17.1 or higher, see the thread "Re: checksumming crap".

Bottom line is, upgrade everything. You want the checksums. Without
them, you risk undetected data corruption (witness win-tests.py).

I don't expect you to have any problems, but if you do (and we can get
a reproducible recipe), then we'll fix it.

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Feb 2 19:51:18 2003