[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: locking branch progress report.

From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman_at_collab.net>
Date: 2004-12-16 19:40:31 CET

On Dec 16, 2004, at 11:52 AM, Jani Averbach wrote:

> On 2004-12-16 10:09-0600, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
>>> The intresting thing is that the Apache was segfaulting
>> I have no idea why apache would segfault, though. Can you look more
>> into that?
> Not very much, sorry.

Aha, I can reproduce!

During a commit, ra_dav sends a PROPPATCH on a 'working baseline'
object as a means of attaching the log message to the commit

Apparently mod_dav tries to 'validate' the request by checking for
locks on the resource first. In the old days, this was a no-op,
because mod_dav_svn didn't provide a locking vtable to mod_dav. But
now mod_dav is asking mod_dav_svn to call svn_fs_get_locks() on a
resource which has a NULL fs path... boom, segfault.

TMI? :-)

Fix coming up. I guess the moral of the story is that I should run
'make davcheck' once in a while, not just the unit tests for fs locking

Thanks for finding!

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Dec 16 19:43:52 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.