[darcs-users] darcs check

[David Roundy]

On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 04:39:49PM -0800, trb at categorical.net wrote:
> Juliusz Chroboczek writes:
>  > > I mean self-inconsistent (e.g. the behaviour I described in my
>  > > message about Issue365, makes a repository invent previously
>  > > non-existent pending changes). Suppose a repository had been
>  > > tampered with in a Byzantine way, but subsequently passed 'darcs
>  > > check'. It could well have been modified, and might no longer be
>  > > consistent with other repositories, but I would hope that it would
>  > > still be self-consistent (by virtue of having passed 'darcs check').
>  > 
>  > Darcs check verifies that the sequence of patches since the last
>  > checkpoint can be applied, and that the result matches the pristine
>  > cache.
> 
> Perhaps it should also check that the result of applying the sequence of patches
> does not include a non-empty set of pending changes. I have a repo where pulling
> all its patches (into a fresh repo) produces spurious pending changes, even
> though the repos pass 'darcs check'

Oh, most likely that just means that you've got a conflict.  You could
verify this by running darcs revert -a (assuming you've got no interesting
unrecorded changes) followed by darcs resolve.  
-- 
David Roundy
http://www.darcs.net