Re: Internal Error: Failed to Load Module for FS type
From: Martin J. Stumpf <mjs_at_jhu.edu>
Date: 2006-02-16 15:36:49 CET
C. Michael Pilato wrote:
I really appreciate all of the hard work that has gone into subversion. The book is excellent and I have learned so much over the years just from this list. Not only how-to, but best practice as well. Occasionally someone has enthusiastically thanked the authors, and after reading this volatile post I felt another hearty round of thanks was in order. You have set a wonderful example of how to diffuse a thorny post. I consider it a great privilege to read the responses of the developers and authors. You know who you are![Taking a deep breath...] Mark, sorry your experience with Subversion has been ... less-than-pleasant. Unfortunately, you've mailed the Subversion source code commits list. Your mail is better aimed at email@example.com (which I'm Cc:ing in this response). That said, some inline responses follow. Mark Galbreath wrote:'bdb'' or 'fsfs' Could not fetch resource information. [500, #0] Could not open the requested SVN filesystem [500, #160033] Yes, I've read every friggin post in the mail archive, everything on the svn website, and even RTFM (book). That being said, I am using Apache 2.2.0 with svn 1.3.0. All the DAV/SVN/AUTHZ modules are loaded, and my httpd.conf entry looks like this: <Location /svn> DAV svn SVNParentPath /opt/svn # one repos under parent right now called 'newwww' # plus all the usual security crap that is commented out right now </Location> Yes, the owner/group of the repos is identical to Apache httpd. So wtf is this fail-to-load error (which screws everything) showing up in the apache error_log every time I try to use the svn client or a web browser to connect to the repos? I've been trying to solve this for 2 days!!!I presume you are trying to access the repository using the URL "http[s]://SERVER/svn/newwww/", yes? Are you able to, as the user that Apache runs as, access the repository via "file:///opt/svn/newwww/" ? Does 'svnlook youngest /opt/svn/newwww' yield anything interesting?And for that matter, wtf am I reading documentation that still refers to 1.1 and 1.2??? If you committers are going to release the software, don't you think updating the DOCUMENTATION would be a Good Thing, too?Are there particular aspects of your problems with Subversion that you feel are specific to versions of Subversion newer than 1.2? Obviously, keeping the documentation up-to-date is desirable, but as with the code, is mostly a volunteer effort. If you have patches which will improve the coverage or quality of that documentation, please submit them (to firstname.lastname@example.org). Thanks.
Thank you very much,
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Received on Thu Feb 16 15:45:32 2006
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.