From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30581 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2013 02:11:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 30570 invoked by uid 89); 27 Jun 2013 02:11:18 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HK_OBFDOM,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 02:11:18 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r5R2BDve022666 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 26 Jun 2013 22:11:14 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-102.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.102]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5R2BA9S024279 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 26 Jun 2013 22:11:12 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Hans-Peter Nilsson Cc: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: sim checkout broken References: <1371835865-15879-1-git-send-email-tromey@redhat.com> <871u7rwodv.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130624224138.GC5326@adacore.com> <87y59ythcd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130625142141.GF5326@adacore.com> <87ppvatfsp.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87bo6ute8b.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <878v1wrghn.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 03:22:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Hans-Peter Nilsson's message of "Wed, 26 Jun 2013 13:55:10 -0400 (EDT)") Message-ID: <87bo6spakh.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg00801.txt.bz2 Tom> Could you say exactly what you are doing? H-P> Oh my, seems I'm a victim of the reproducibility-ignorance-demon H-P> despite extensive training. Sorry about that. Hubris, I guess. :/ Don't worry about it. Tom> Indeed, if I run the same "cvs co sim" command twice, the second time I Tom> get: Tom> Tom> cvs checkout: existing repository /cvs/src/CVSROOT/Emptydir does not Tom> match /cvs/src/src/gdb Tom> Tom> ... but cvs still exits with status 0 for me. H-P> Odd; it being 1 for me doesn't seem version-dependent. Ugh. H-P> cvs checkout: existing repository /cvs/src/CVSROOT/Emptydir does not H-P> match /cvs/src/src/gdb H-P> I don't think it would. On another machine, at the second H-P> checkout (with the first identical command populating the tree) H-P> with a CVS version apparently matching yours, the same thing H-P> happens: H-P> cvs checkout: existing repository /cvs/src/CVSROOT/Emptydir does not H-P> match /cvs/src/src/gdb H-P> cvs checkout: ignoring module src/gdb/version.in H-P> [hp@derp sim]$ echo $? H-P> 1 H-P> [hp@derp sim]$ rpm -q cvs H-P> cvs-1.11.23-25.fc17.x86_64 There must be some difference since: barimba. cvs -d :pserver:anoncvs@sourceware.org:/cvs/src co sim [...] cvs checkout: Updating src/intl cvs checkout: existing repository /cvs/src/CVSROOT/Emptydir does not match /cvs/src/src/gdb cvs checkout: ignoring module src/gdb/version.in barimba. echo $? 0 I have: barimba. rpm -q cvs cvs-1.11.23-29.fc18.x86_64 Based on "rpm -q --changelog" it is hard to believe that anything between -25 and -29 changed this. H-P> But what is the cause of the error? Can't we just remove that H-P> Emptydir or revert what was done? The message above seems to H-P> indicate an operational error in whatever was done. Based on my searches it seems to be a CVS issue. CVS, IIUC, puts "Emptydir" into the Repository file of some directories in some situations. This later confuses it. I don't really understand this, though, since no Repository file in my checkout actually has this. Maybe we should just give up on part of this patch and move the version.in file back out of "common". sim really should not be using this file. Tom