* Inconsistance in snapshots repository @ 1998-04-14 9:37 Gabriel Dos Reis 1998-04-14 13:21 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-14 15:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer 0 siblings, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread From: Gabriel Dos Reis @ 1998-04-14 9:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: egcs % ls egcs.cygnus.com:/pub/egcs/snapshots/ 1.0.1-prerelease/ 1997-10-16/ 1998-02-14/ 1.0.2-prerelease/ 1997-10-23/ 1998-02-21/ 1997-08-14/ 1997-10-31/ 1998-03-02/ 1997-08-21/ 1997-11-05/ 1998-03-08/ 1997-08-25/ 1997-11-14/ 1998-03-15/ 1997-08-28/ 1997-11-22/ 1998-03-21/ 1997-09-01/ 1997-11-27/ 1998-03-28/ 1997-09-04/ 1997-12-01/ 1998-04-06/ 1997-09-07/ 1997-12-07/ 1998-04-11/ 1997-09-10/ 1997-12-15/ LATEST-IS-1998-04-06 <---- 1997-09-17/ 1997-12-25/ LATEST-IS-1998-04011 <---- 1997-09-22/ 1998-01-15/ README 1997-09-24/ 1998-01-22/ core/ 1997-09-29/ 1998-01-29/ index.html 1997-10-08/ 1998-02-05/ old/ One LATEST-IS-1998-04xxxxxx should be sufficient :-) BTW, the mirror respository ftp.lip6.fr:/pub/egcs/snapshots/1998-04-11/ is incomplete. Cheers, -- Gaby ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-14 9:37 Inconsistance in snapshots repository Gabriel Dos Reis @ 1998-04-14 13:21 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-14 15:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer 1 sibling, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-14 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gabriel Dos Reis; +Cc: egcs snapshot dir problem: fixed, including the typo in the name. mirror problem: out of my hands. One can only hope it'll re-sync itself. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-14 9:37 Inconsistance in snapshots repository Gabriel Dos Reis 1998-04-14 13:21 ` Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-14 15:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer 1998-04-14 21:01 ` Alexandre Oliva 1998-04-14 23:16 ` Jeffrey A Law 1 sibling, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread From: Gerald Pfeifer @ 1998-04-14 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: egcs On Tue, 14 Apr 1998, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > 1997-09-10/ 1997-12-15/ LATEST-IS-1998-04-06 <---- > 1997-09-17/ 1997-12-25/ LATEST-IS-1998-04011 <---- On a related note, I realized that in the CVS repository gcc/version.c still has "egcs-2.91.23 980404". On another related note: What happended to the idea of bumping the date more regularily, e.g., daily? And on a final related note, I suggest to use 19980404 instead of 980404, unless egcs won't be Y2000-compliant! <g> Gerald -- Gerald Pfeifer (Jerry) Vienna University of Technology pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-14 15:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer @ 1998-04-14 21:01 ` Alexandre Oliva 1998-04-15 15:09 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-14 23:16 ` Jeffrey A Law 1 sibling, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread From: Alexandre Oliva @ 1998-04-14 21:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gerald Pfeifer; +Cc: egcs Gerald Pfeifer writes: > And on a final related note, I suggest to use 19980404 instead of 980404, > unless egcs won't be Y2000-compliant! <g> BTW, would it be possible to have a ``moving tag'' called `egcs_latest_snapshot', updated whenever a snapshot is released? With this, I would be able to simply `cvs update' my CVS tree, instead of having to `cvs update -r egcs_ss_<snapshot>'. This has got harder over time, since snapshots are released with dates from 2-3 days ago, and I was bitten by a mistyped date more than once already. Jeff? -- Alexandre Oliva mailto:oliva@dcc.unicamp.br mailto:aoliva@acm.org http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~oliva Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-14 21:01 ` Alexandre Oliva @ 1998-04-15 15:09 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-15 23:03 ` Raja R Harinath 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Craig Burley 0 siblings, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-15 15:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alexandre Oliva; +Cc: Gerald Pfeifer, egcs In message < orpviju78e.fsf@zecarneiro.lsd.dcc.unicamp.br >you write: > Gerald Pfeifer writes: > > > And on a final related note, I suggest to use 19980404 instead of 980404, > > unless egcs won't be Y2000-compliant! <g> > > BTW, would it be possible to have a ``moving tag'' called > `egcs_latest_snapshot', updated whenever a snapshot is released? This is an excellent idea. The only trick is to coordinate it with the actual "release" of a snapshot. It would require another checkout and tag operation to occur when the snapshot is actually released. And thus has to be done outside of the normal snapshot script (and therefore is more prone to user error). > With this, I would be able to simply `cvs update' my CVS tree, instead > of having to `cvs update -r egcs_ss_<snapshot>'. This has got harder > over time, since snapshots are released with dates from 2-3 days ago, > and I was bitten by a mistyped date more than once already. Jeff? In general, I'd like to make the snapshots available immediately, but I haven't had time to double check them for accuracy in a timely manner lately. The message probably won't go to the list for 24hrs since we want the snapshots to propagate to the mirrors, but I'd really like to make the snapshot available as soon as the script is finished. This would also allow the "latest snapshot tag" to be maintained by the snapshot script itself. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-15 15:09 ` Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-15 23:03 ` Raja R Harinath 1998-04-16 10:35 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Craig Burley 1 sibling, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread From: Raja R Harinath @ 1998-04-15 23:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: egcs Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com> writes: > In message < orpviju78e.fsf@zecarneiro.lsd.dcc.unicamp.br >you write: > > Gerald Pfeifer writes: > > > > > And on a final related note, I suggest to use 19980404 instead of 980404, > > > unless egcs won't be Y2000-compliant! <g> > > > > BTW, would it be possible to have a ``moving tag'' called > > `egcs_latest_snapshot', updated whenever a snapshot is released? > This is an excellent idea. The only trick is to coordinate it with > the actual "release" of a snapshot. > > It would require another checkout and tag operation to occur when > the snapshot is actually released. And thus has to be done outside > of the normal snapshot script (and therefore is more prone to user > error). Wouldn't cvs -d /path/to/repo rtag -r egcs_ss_YYYYMMDD -F egcs_latest_snapshot egcs do the trick. - Hari -- Raja R Harinath ------------------------------ harinath@cs.umn.edu "When all else fails, read the instructions." -- Cahn's Axiom "Our policy is, when in doubt, do the right thing." -- Roy L Ash ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-15 23:03 ` Raja R Harinath @ 1998-04-16 10:35 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-16 10:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Raja R Harinath; +Cc: egcs In message < d9pviiz5ol.fsf@sejong.cs.umn.edu >you write: > Wouldn't > > cvs -d /path/to/repo rtag -r egcs_ss_YYYYMMDD -F egcs_latest_snapshot egcs I'm not sure. The documentation on the exact behavior of -r with tag/rtag was unclear when I looked at the documentation. My (rather quick) reading of the docs led me to believe that command would: Tag all the head revision for all files containing the tag egcs_ss_YYYYMMDD. But it's possible I mis-understood -- this was one of the things I'd planned to experiment with. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-15 15:09 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-15 23:03 ` Raja R Harinath @ 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Craig Burley 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Alexandre Oliva 1 sibling, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread From: Craig Burley @ 1998-04-16 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: law; +Cc: oliva, pfeifer, egcs > > BTW, would it be possible to have a ``moving tag'' called > > `egcs_latest_snapshot', updated whenever a snapshot is released? >This is an excellent idea. The only trick is to coordinate it with >the actual "release" of a snapshot. I'm CVS-unaware, but, generally, is this really guaranteed to provide a coherent snapshot to anyone, anytime, including if they try using it while a snapshot is being produced (and the "moving tag" updated)? That is, is whatever procedure people normally use to obtain a snapshot via CVS guaranteed to obtain either all the files for snapshot N *or* all the files for P, but never a mix, if, partway through said obtaining, snapshot N is "replaced" as the "latest" with snapshot P? (E.g. I could think of this moving tag idea as perhaps a symbolic link to a directory containing a snapshot in a non-CVS universe. Whenver a new snapshot is made, after its directory is fully populated and coherent, the symbolic link is simply updated. That works fine for simple uses like "cd .../symbolic-link; cp -a * ...", because cd'ing to a symbolic link really cd's to the directory it points to, at least in most cases; it's not just an updating of some environment symbol. But, in effect, it *might* be if the target directory is mounted by NFS. Further, if the procedure is more complicated, e.g. "cp -a .../symbolic-link/file-a ...; cp -a .../symbolic-link/file-b ...; cp -a .../symbolic-link/file-c ...", then a change to the symbolic link *can* affect the procedure midstream.) If the answer to the above is not definitely "yes, it's always guaranteed", then I think it's best to set up whatever means is appropriate to *designate* a given snapshot as the "latest" and encourage everyone to use procedures that obtain that designation only *once* per snapshot-grab. In essence, copy that designation to a local temporary variable that is thus guaranteed to not change while the snapshot is obtained (using that same temporary variable to specify the stuff being obtained). tq vm, (burley) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Craig Burley @ 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-17 14:42 ` Joe Buck 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Alexandre Oliva 1 sibling, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-16 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Craig Burley; +Cc: oliva, pfeifer, egcs In message < 199804162331.TAA25018@melange.gnu.org >you write: > I'm CVS-unaware, but, generally, is this really guaranteed to provide > a coherent snapshot to anyone, anytime, including if they try using > it while a snapshot is being produced (and the "moving tag" updated)? Nope. But what it does do for the CVS folks is allow them to upgrade to whatever the current snapshot happens to be without knowing the exact name of the tag. I think that was the idea behind the suggestion. The tag doesn't move until I make the snapshot available. And the window where things can get out of sync is relatively small; directories are locked as the tag is added/moved. [ I'm not a CVS expert - there may or may not be things in CVS to prevent the following "problems". ] To get an out of sync tree you'd have to start after the tag process and somehow get ahead of the tag process (might be able to happen if for example you don't have some subdirs and can "leap frog" over the tag process while the tag process walks through the subdirs. Another possibility would be an update starting after tagging, then both the update & tag block waiting on the same lock. The updater might be able to get the lock before the tagger and get an inconsistent tree. The opposite of those cases might be able to happen too. In both situations another cvs update ought to fix any inconsistencies. I don't consider these serious prolems (if they exist at all), but others may disagree. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-17 14:42 ` Joe Buck 1998-04-17 23:53 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread From: Joe Buck @ 1998-04-17 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: law; +Cc: burley, oliva, pfeifer, egcs In message < 199804162331.TAA25018@melange.gnu.org >you write: > > I'm CVS-unaware, but, generally, is this really guaranteed to provide > > a coherent snapshot to anyone, anytime, including if they try using > > it while a snapshot is being produced (and the "moving tag" updated)? > Nope. But what it does do for the CVS folks is allow them to > upgrade to whatever the current snapshot happens to be without > knowing the exact name of the tag. Ah, but it seems like a lot of work. How about finger latest-egcs-snapshot@cygnus.com to find that out? It certainly would be more robust. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-17 14:42 ` Joe Buck @ 1998-04-17 23:53 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-17 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joe Buck; +Cc: burley, oliva, pfeifer, egcs In message < 199804171629.JAA04146@atrus.synopsys.com >you write: > In message < 199804162331.TAA25018@melange.gnu.org >you write: > > > I'm CVS-unaware, but, generally, is this really guaranteed to provide > > > a coherent snapshot to anyone, anytime, including if they try using > > > it while a snapshot is being produced (and the "moving tag" updated)? > > Nope. But what it does do for the CVS folks is allow them to > > upgrade to whatever the current snapshot happens to be without > > knowing the exact name of the tag. > > Ah, but it seems like a lot of work. How about > > finger latest-egcs-snapshot@cygnus.com > > to find that out? It certainly would be more robust. Actually, it turns out the cvs command posted to this group will do the right thing. So, at the time I make the snapshot available I just issue the magic CVS command, and in 2-5 minutes the "latest snapshot" tag is in place. Folks can then check out the tree using a sticky tag, later "cvs update" operations will only change things if there's been a newer snapshot made. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Craig Burley 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Alexandre Oliva 1998-04-16 18:39 ` Craig Burley 1 sibling, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread From: Alexandre Oliva @ 1998-04-16 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Craig Burley; +Cc: law, pfeifer, egcs Craig Burley <burley@gnu.org> writes: >> > BTW, would it be possible to have a ``moving tag'' called >> > `egcs_latest_snapshot', updated whenever a snapshot is released? >> This is an excellent idea. The only trick is to coordinate it with >> the actual "release" of a snapshot. > I'm CVS-unaware, but, generally, is this really guaranteed to provide > a coherent snapshot to anyone, anytime, including if they try using > it while a snapshot is being produced (and the "moving tag" updated)? Nope. If you checkout or update the moving tag while it is being moved, you may get some files from the previous snapshot and some from the new one. However, since snapshots are produced weekly, and we can count on having this tag moved just before the announcement, there's high probability that, if you update your tree just after getting an announcement, it will be a coherent one. Furthermore, if you fear you may have got an inconsistent snapshot, just run `cvs update' again; if you get any changes, wait some time for the moving tag to get stable or specify a fixed tag. -- Alexandre Oliva mailto:oliva@dcc.unicamp.br mailto:aoliva@acm.org http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~oliva Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Alexandre Oliva @ 1998-04-16 18:39 ` Craig Burley 1998-04-16 18:39 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread From: Craig Burley @ 1998-04-16 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: oliva; +Cc: law, pfeifer, egcs >However, since snapshots are produced weekly, and we can count on >having this tag moved just before the announcement, there's high >probability that, if you update your tree just after getting an >announcement, it will be a coherent one. > >Furthermore, if you fear you may have got an inconsistent snapshot, >just run `cvs update' again; if you get any changes, wait some time >for the moving tag to get stable or specify a fixed tag. Good enough for me, especially if these reminders accompany any document/email (automated or otherwise) that tell people about the tag! tq vm, (burley) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-16 18:39 ` Craig Burley @ 1998-04-16 18:39 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-16 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Craig Burley; +Cc: oliva, pfeifer, egcs In message < 199804170133.VAA25400@melange.gnu.org >you write: > >Furthermore, if you fear you may have got an inconsistent snapshot, > >just run `cvs update' again; if you get any changes, wait some time > >for the moving tag to get stable or specify a fixed tag. > > Good enough for me, especially if these reminders accompany any > document/email (automated or otherwise) that tell people about > the tag! Also good ideas. Look for them in the next snapshot :-0 jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-14 15:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer 1998-04-14 21:01 ` Alexandre Oliva @ 1998-04-14 23:16 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-23 13:31 ` Gerald Pfeifer 1 sibling, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-14 23:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gerald Pfeifer; +Cc: egcs In message < Pine.GSO.3.96.980415001559.3746A-100000@alcyone.dbai.tuwien.ac.at >you write: > On Tue, 14 Apr 1998, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > > 1997-09-10/ 1997-12-15/ LATEST-IS-1998-04-06 <---- > > 1997-09-17/ 1997-12-25/ LATEST-IS-1998-04011 <---- > > On a related note, I realized that in the CVS repository gcc/version.c > still has "egcs-2.91.23 980404". I'll look into it, probably a consequence of running the snapshot script a few dozen times and tweaking it in the process. > On another related note: What happended to the idea of bumping the date > more regularily, e.g., daily? No time. Like most things a contribution of code would greatly speed up the process. > And on a final related note, I suggest to use 19980404 instead of 980404, > unless egcs won't be Y2000-compliant! <g> Probably a good idea, even those it's just a version string and means nothing to the compiler itself. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-14 23:16 ` Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-04-23 13:31 ` Gerald Pfeifer 1998-05-24 2:32 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread From: Gerald Pfeifer @ 1998-04-23 13:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: law; +Cc: egcs On Tue, 14 Apr 1998, Jeffrey A Law wrote: >> On another related note: What happended to the idea of bumping the date >> more regularily, e.g., daily? > No time. Like most things a contribution of code would greatly > speed up the process. I'm not sure whether the following is what you have asked for, but... Here we go: -------- cut here -------- #!/bin/sh cvs update version.c CURR_DATE=`date +"%Y%m%d"` OLD_VERSION=`cat version.c` sed -e "s/\(.*egcs-[^ ]*\) [^ ]*/\1 ${CURR_DATE}/" >version.c <<HERE $OLD_VERSION HERE cvs commit -m "Daily bump." version.c -------- cut here -------- Is that useable for you? >> And on a final related note, I suggest to use 19980404 instead of 980404, >> unless egcs won't be Y2000-compliant! <g> > Probably a good idea [...] Indeed I noticed that the latest snapshot now carries a 4-digit year, so none can complain about my script introducing this... ;-) Gerald -- Gerald Pfeifer (Jerry) Vienna University of Technology pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Inconsistance in snapshots repository 1998-04-23 13:31 ` Gerald Pfeifer @ 1998-05-24 2:32 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-05-24 2:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gerald Pfeifer; +Cc: egcs In message <Pine.GSO.3.96.980423203837.6934Q-100000@alcyone.dbai.tuwien.ac.at >you write: > On Tue, 14 Apr 1998, Jeffrey A Law wrote: > >> On another related note: What happended to the idea of bumping the date > >> more regularily, e.g., daily? > > No time. Like most things a contribution of code would greatly > > speed up the process. > > I'm not sure whether the following is what you have asked for, but... > Here we go: Close. It needed a few minor tweaks to make it a little more "crontab" safe/aware. We'll know if it works in about 45 minutes :-) Note now that the date string is updated daily the date string will no longer be updated by the snapshot script. The snapshot script will only update the version #. jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1998-05-24 2:32 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 17+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 1998-04-14 9:37 Inconsistance in snapshots repository Gabriel Dos Reis 1998-04-14 13:21 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-14 15:23 ` Gerald Pfeifer 1998-04-14 21:01 ` Alexandre Oliva 1998-04-15 15:09 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-15 23:03 ` Raja R Harinath 1998-04-16 10:35 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Craig Burley 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-17 14:42 ` Joe Buck 1998-04-17 23:53 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-16 23:59 ` Alexandre Oliva 1998-04-16 18:39 ` Craig Burley 1998-04-16 18:39 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-14 23:16 ` Jeffrey A Law 1998-04-23 13:31 ` Gerald Pfeifer 1998-05-24 2:32 ` Jeffrey A Law
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).