[darcs-devel] [issue1763] "m doesn't conflict with mm in is_consistent" after darcs1 -> darcs2 conversion

[Attila Lendvai]

Attila Lendvai <attila.lendvai at gmail.com> added the comment:

err, it has nothing to do with darcs convert. i suspect it's much more due to 
something like having non-ascii in file names that are being removed and later 
conflicted.

the following happens with two branches of a freshly initialized darcs2 repo that 
i've created after i gave up on darcs convert-ing (see earlier messages in this 
bug report):

what happens below: there are two branches: old and new. i try to pull over a 
patch from old into new. this patch changes a file in old that has been deleted in 
new. pulling marks the conflict. trying to pull again from the old repo ends up in 
the assert both with 2.3.1 and 2.4.





alendvai at ed101:/tmp/ebr42.new-branch$ darcs push ../ebr42.old-branch/
Pushing to "/tmp/ebr42.old-branch"...
Fri Mar 12 15:47:16 CET 2010  attila.lendvai at gmail.com
  * rename src to source
Shall I push this patch? (1/38)  [ynWvplxdaqjk], or ? for help: q
Push cancelled.
alendvai at ed101:/tmp/ebr42.new-branch$ darcs pull ../ebr42.old-branch/
Pulling from "/tmp/ebr42.old-branch"...
Tue Mar 16 12:01:35 CET 2010  tomi.borbely at gmail.com
  * fix beszámoló pdf
Shall I pull this patch? (1/5)  [ynWsfvplxdaqjk], or ? for help: v
[fix beszámoló pdf
tomi.borbely at gmail.com**20100316110135
 Ignore-this: b136ac646a51ed2a84f2ff01e187fc79
] hunk ./src/presentation/kitöltés.lisp 963
-                                                                             
(list (list fenntartó) validity current-time)))))
+                                                                             
(list (list fenntartó) (list *gyökér-támogatási-jogcím/egyedi-megállapodások*) 
validity current-time)))))
Shall I pull this patch? (1/5)  [ynWsfvplxdaqjk], or ? for help: y
Fri Mar 19 09:59:34 CET 2010  attila.lendvai at gmail.com
  * renames around támogatási-kifizetés/átutalt-támogatási-összeg
Shall I pull this patch? (2/5)  [ynWvplxdaqjk], or ? for help: d
We have conflicts in the following files:
./source/presentation/kitöltés.lisp
Finished pulling and applying.
alendvai at ed101:/tmp/ebr42.new-branch$ darcs w -l
M ./source/presentation/kitöltés.lisp -1 +1
alendvai at ed101:/tmp/ebr42.new-branch$ darcs pull ../ebr42.old-branch/
Pulling from "/tmp/ebr42.old-branch"...
darcs: Inconsistent patch:
conflictor [
hunk ./source/presentation/kitöltés.lisp 1
-(in-package :ebr42-presentation)
-
-;;;;;;
-;;; naturális mutató kitöltés title component
-

[**** loads of line deletion skipped here ****]

-                                                                                  
(név-of it))
-                                                                        :titulus 
(vezetői-titulus *felmérési-alany*)
-                                                                        
:intézmény (név-of *felmérési-alany*)))))))))
rmfile ./source/presentation/kitöltés.lisp
]
|:
hunk ./source/presentation/kit�lt�s.lisp 963
-                                                                             
(list (list fenntartó) validity current-time)))))
+                                                                             
(list (list fenntartó) (list *gyökér-támogatási-jogcím/egyedi-megállapodások*) 
validity current-time)))))
m doesn't conflict with mm in is_consistent








after reverting and unpulling the patch:

alendvai at ed101:/tmp/ebr42.new-branch$ ~/bin/darcs-2.4 check
The repository is consistent!
Hash mismatch(es)!                           
source/presentation
    index: 8f54cfa7b1f8e51b1289394451e27edf26c505c67d5774ed6dbd2353f970852d
  working: 618508e7a997b332df6194b6a1b9be388f247f843cfea8fb78e5d888b8cbf736
source
    index: a910343fe1fafaa78e968cad0a631f220b7ee9eff7a7d84040ec9d99ba1e452d
  working: 452e74e53d3b1675cc83357be71212fb7942a77b179b205e1c14fb991a119863

Bad index.




which is another bug i've reported and might be related: 
http://bugs.darcs.net/issue1756

as far as i can see 2.3.1 ad 2.4 behaves exactly the same, including the bad index 
(except that only 2.4 detects the bad index).

hope this helps!

__________________________________
Darcs bug tracker <bugs at darcs.net>
<http://bugs.darcs.net/issue1763>
__________________________________