On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 at 21:06, Ivan Zhakov <i...@visualsvn.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 at 21:37, Ivan Zhakov <i...@visualsvn.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 13 Sept 2021 at 11:57, Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 3:58 PM Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 9:59 AM Mariusz W <mawa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > On 2021/01/26 14:54:04, Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 10:25 AM Johan Corveleyn <
>> jcor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 8:17 PM William A Rowe Jr <
>> wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Sorry, I'd been pounding on a beta deliverable, it's my bad.
>> This coming week I have cycles to give
>> > > > > > > back to APR, CMake and other projects neglected during this
>> crunch period. I hope an end-of-year
>> > > > > > > (or very early January) release will meet your goals..
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Yes, thanks, and no problem. I think that might be just in
>> time, so
>> > > > > > I'm crossing my fingers :-).
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > (as you might know, Subversion development is going quite
>> slowly these
>> > > > > > days, so it's hard to say when the cycles of the different
>> volunteers
>> > > > > > will align -- it might be end of this year still, but I'm
>> guessing
>> > > > > > it's more likely to be early January too I think ... we're
>> progressing
>> > > > > > with small steps here and there)
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > > Maybe problem is in this line 627 in filestat.c [1] (changed in
>> revision [2]) mainly by adding APR_FINFO_LINK in line 627
>> > > >
>> > > > Diff to prev: [3]
>> > > > I think that this change is causing that "if" branch is not
>> executed (svn is using APR_FINFO_LINK in call) and in "else" branch we get
>> error from FindFirstFileW [6] because root (e.g. after subst) is ending
>> with "/" or "\" as in example from [4])
>> > > > The error code 720002 from apr_stat means ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND
>> (code 2 (0x2) [5]) from FindFirstFileW plus some adding and multiplication
>> operations in apr layer (last digit in 720002 is code 2).
>> > > >
>> > > > [1] -
>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/apr/apr/branches/1.7.x/file_io/win32/filestat.c?view=markup#l627
>> > > > [2] - https://svn.apache.org/r1855950
>> > > > [3] -
>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/apr/apr/branches/1.7.x/file_io/win32/filestat.c?r1=1795930&r2=1855950&pathrev=1855950&diff_format=h
>> > > > [4] -
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rd890d13b826e8cd7acaa96769e10e7143b7e35e11c99bcaa1a75d481%40%3Cdev.apr.apache.org%3E
>> > > > [5] -
>> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/debug/system-error-codes--0-499-
>> > > > [6] -
>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/apr/apr/branches/1.7.x/file_io/win32/filestat.c?view=markup#l642
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards,
>> > > > Mariusz
>> > >
>> > > Thanks for looking into this, Mariusz.
>> > >
>> > > I think you might be onto something. I intended to look closer into
>> > > your diagnosis, and perhaps try to test if changing those lines back
>> > > to the original would fix it. But I didn't get around to it, sorry.
>> > >
>> > > Now that there was talk of an APR 1.7.1 release on this list, it
>> > > popped back into my memory :-).
>> > >
>> > > @apr devs: what do you think about Mariusz pointer towards the
>> > > possible cause of what we're seeing with SVN on Windows with apr
>> > > 1.7.0? And is there an easy fix (for instance, just reverting that
>> > > single hunk), which has a chance of being accepted into 1.7.1 (if so,
>> > > I'll try to test it on my svn-dev machine, where I could reproduce the
>> > > issue)? IIUC, right now apr_stat does seem to error out on paths
>> > > ending with "/" or "\" on Windows, if APR_FINFO_LINK is given (while
>> > > APR 1.6 did return a sensible result in that case).
>> > >
>> > > To be clear, IIUC Mariusz is referring to this hunk in filestat.c in
>> r1855950:
>> > >
>> > > [[[
>> > > @@ -590,7 +664,7 @@ APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_stat(apr_f
>> > >          rv = apr_filepath_root(&root, &test, APR_FILEPATH_NATIVE,
>> pool);
>> > >          isroot = (root && *root && !(*test));
>> > >
>> > > -        if ((apr_os_level >= APR_WIN_98) && (!(wanted &
>> > > APR_FINFO_NAME) || isroot))
>> > > +        if ((apr_os_level >= APR_WIN_98) && (!(wanted &
>> > > (APR_FINFO_NAME | APR_FINFO_LINK)) || isroot))
>> > >          {
>> > >              /* cannot use FindFile on a Win98 root, it returns \*
>> > >               * GetFileAttributesExA is not available on Win95
>> > > ]]]
>> >
>> > Oops, I meant (or Mariusz meant) this hunk in filestat.c r1855950:
>> >
>> > [[[
>> >
>> > @@ -555,7 +624,7 @@ APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_stat(apr_f
>> >          if ((rv = utf8_to_unicode_path(wfname, sizeof(wfname)
>> >                                              / sizeof(apr_wchar_t),
>> fname)))
>> >              return rv;
>> > -        if (!(wanted & APR_FINFO_NAME)) {
>> > +        if (!(wanted & (APR_FINFO_NAME | APR_FINFO_LINK))) {
>> >              if (!GetFileAttributesExW(wfname, GetFileExInfoStandard,
>> >                                        &FileInfo.i))
>> >                  return apr_get_os_error();
>> >
>> > ]]]
>> >
>> > And yes, if I revert that single hunk, the Subversion problem with
>> > subst'ed drives on Windows (or working copies on drive roots) is gone!
>> >
>> > Of course, I have no idea what other effects this has, but just
>> > confirming that taking another turn in the above conditional (like it
>> > was before) makes apr_stat return the same (AFAICS) as in 1.6.5, for
>> > substed drives or drive roots on Windows.
>> >
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The problem with apr_stat(APR_FINFO_LINK | APR_FINFO_MIN) should be
>> fixed by r1896717 [1] in trunk.
>>
>> This fix also should resolve performance regression in apr_stat()
>> in most common cases.
>>
>> I plan to backport this fix to APR 1.7.x at some point later.
>>
>> I've backported the r1896717 fix to 1.8.x branch. Please test and vote.
>
>
The change backported to the 1.7.x branch in r1904030 and released as part
of APR 1.7.1.

-- 
Ivan Zhakov

Reply via email to