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

Re: broken lock test

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:18:12 +0200 (Jerusalem Standard Time)

Blair Zajac wrote on Mon, 26 Jan 2009 at 19:19 -0800:
>
> On Dec 26, 2008, at 5:16 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>
> > Brieuc Jeunhomme wrote on Fri, 28 Nov 2008 at 17:41 +0100:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have found something that looks to me like a bug, although I don't
> > > know how I came to this situation. I have more detail about the problem
> > > if needed, I can fill a bug report with all of it if it's confirmed it
> > > is a bug.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I am the only one using the svn repository, on a remote server
> > > (svn+ssh://...). I am using 1.5.4. The symptoms are the following: I
> > > try to do an update, svn complains about a lock and suggests a cleanup.
> > > I perform a cleanup, and try to update again, without any success.
> > >
> > >
> > > % svn update
> > >
> > > Fetching external item into 'specs'
> > > svn: Working copy 'specs' locked
> > > svn: run 'svn cleanup' to remove locks (type 'svn help cleanup' for
> > > details)
> > > % ./build-subversion-1.5.4/bin/svn cleanup
> > > % ./build-subversion-1.5.4/bin/svn update
> > >
> > > Fetching external item into 'specs'
> > > svn: Working copy 'specs' locked
> > > svn: run 'svn cleanup' to remove locks (type 'svn help cleanup' for
> > > details)
> > >
> >
> > Yes, that's obviously a bug --- especially if you can reproduce it with
> > a new checkout (i.e., it's not something gone broken in that specific
> > working copy).
> >
> > Can you show us how to reproduce this bug, starting with a new
> > repository? If possible, package the instructions as a script (e.g.,
> > http://svn.tigris.org/repro-template.sh). Thanks.
>
> Fyi, Brieuc opened a ticket on this
>
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3363
>
> which I closed without seeing this the link back to this thread.
>
> There's two separate issues. One that doing potentially multiple control-C's
> to svn can leave the working copy in a locked state. The code currently
> catches signals and does the best job to clean up the wc and leave it in a
> good state, but you can always kill -9 or potentially send enough control-C's
> to kill it and leave the wc in a locked state.
>

Well, sure, if you do 'kill -9', the wc will remain locked. But I don't
think Brieuc said (in the email) that he did used either that or ^C. So
I assumed no signals were involved.

> The other issue is that svn cleanup could be improved to descend into
> svn:externals and also clean those up.
>

Agreed.

Daniel

> So I don't see a bug here, only potentially an improvement to svn cleanup.
>
> Regards,
> Blair
>

------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1057760
Received on 2009-01-27 09:40:18 CET

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