Hi again, Max Brown <[email protected]> writes: > Here is what I did in the end, and this seems to have worked: > 1) I pulled patches until I got to the patch that was failing. > 2) I tried to apply the patch manually to see why it was failing (it > replaced a line, where the text to be replaced in the actual file was > different from the text that the patch wanted to replace...? I don't > know how I managed to create that confusion in the first place.) This sounds like a typical case of pristine corruption. Plain (non-hashed) repositories are very susceptible to this, since they cannot detect the problem until they try to apply the resulting patch on a non-corrupt version of the pristine (which could be months or years after the patch was first created, in private repositories... even for branches of public repositories, discovering this can take a rather long time). That's also why hashed repositories are strongly encouraged.
> 3) I then edited the corresponding patch in _darcs/patches so that it > would not fail (gunzip, then edit, then gzip). > 4) I then did a 'darcs get' to get a new copy of the fixed repository. > This now worked. > 5) I did a 'darcs convert' on the new copy, which now worked. Great! Thanks for sharing the notes on this. And also thanks for going through the process. > Question: What did you mean by "make a new hashed copy"? is this step 4? Yes, that's what I meant. Yours, Petr. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
