Guten Tag David Hopkins,
am Donnerstag, 15. September 2011 um 04:30 schrieben Sie:
> What steps should I take to fix the corrupted revision?
If you have a backup, replace the file wih the backed up one. If you
don't, really really bad and it's the next you should take care of. In
the worst case y
Guten Tag Michael Chen,
am Mittwoch, 14. September 2011 um 14:16 schrieben Sie:
> [chensy@chen working]$ more /home/svn/shortfall/db/revs/1
> /home/svn/shortfall/db/revs/1: Permission denied
Just to be sure you should provide the permissions for the folder
directly, too.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
David Hopkins wrote on Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:30:46 +0800:
> Greetings,
>
> I have an SVN repo that is failing svnadmin verify on revision 192.
>
> For some reason the verify output says:
>
> [...various successful revisions...]
> * Verified revision 191.
> svnadmin: Can't read file 'E:\Re
Hi,
In our SharpSVN-based software, we happened to have recursive calls to
GetStatus inside the progress notification handlers. This worked fine
using SVN 1.6, but now with SVN 1.7, some operations like Checkout throw
an Exception, due to the working copy database being locked.
Maybe our internal
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:41:58AM +0200, Markus Schaber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In our SharpSVN-based software, we happened to have recursive calls to
> GetStatus inside the progress notification handlers. This worked fine
> using SVN 1.6, but now with SVN 1.7, some operations like Checkout throw
> an E
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@elego.de]
> Sent: donderdag 15 september 2011 11:28
> To: Markus Schaber
> Cc: users@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Recursion / reentrancy in SVN 1.7
>
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:41:58AM +0200, Markus Schaber wrote:
> > Hi
Hi, Bert,
Von: Bert Huijben [mailto:b...@qqmail.nl]
> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:41:58AM +0200, Markus Schaber wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > In our SharpSVN-based software, we happened to have recursive
calls
> > > to GetStatus inside the progress notification handlers. This
worked
> > > fine u
Thanks Andreas.
Even if I logout and login manytimes, I still cannot access the folder.
However, after I reboot the CentOS5, I can access the folder.
I have to say, this immediately reminds me Windoze, where reboot is a must
for many scenarios.
Is there an explaination why a linux system needs
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 08:23:48AM -0400, Michael Chen wrote:
> Is there an explaination why a linux system needs reboot before the group
> access right is allowed?
A user's group membership list is set at login time.
So you need to logout and login.
No need to reboot, though it has the same effec
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Michael Chen
wrote:
> Thanks Andreas.
>
> Even if I logout and login manytimes, I still cannot access the folder.
>
> However, after I reboot the CentOS5, I can access the folder.
>
> I have to say, this immediately reminds me Windoze, where reboot is a must
> for
Thanks Daniel. Responses inline.
>> David Hopkins wrote on Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:30:46 +0800: I'm not
sure
>> why the verification command for revision 192 would throw an error
>> description for revision 162. Revision 192 affected a completely
>> different part of the repository to revision
David Hopkins wrote on Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 08:30:14 +0800:
> Thanks Daniel. Responses inline.
>
> >> David Hopkins wrote on Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:30:46 +0800: I'm not
> sure
> >> why the verification command for revision 192 would throw an error
> >> description for revision 162. Revision 19
David Hopkins wrote on Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 08:30:14 +0800:
> > Here's the context in the rev file:
> > id: y-31.0-32.r192/673830
> > type: file
> > pred: y-31.0.r31/264323
> > count: 1
> > text: 162 670867 6111 52486 5117fb0964ca1a78dd97447d23452e73
> > 609f4745460d6e14860daff0803ee7024c54898c 191
13 matches
Mail list logo
