[darcs-users] TortoiseDarcs and Darcs 2 Hashed Repos

Grant Husbands grant.husbands at businesswebsoftware.com
Mon Oct 13 11:12:47 UTC 2008


David Roundy wrote:
> Were your tests done by  any chance with a darcs compiled with ghc
> 6.8.2 or earlier (but post ghc 6.6)? If so, you may suffering from a
> ghc bug.

I'm afraid it's not compiled with 6.8.2 or earlier. It's the "version 
2.0.2 + 75 patches" one from 
<http://wiki.darcs.net/DarcsWiki/CategoryBinaries>. I've attached its 
--exact-version.

# darcs2 +RTS --info | find "version"
  ,("GHC version", "6.8.3")

Shortest testcase:
# mkdir test
# cd test
# darcs2 init --darcs-2
# echo a >a
---wait a while---
# darcs2 record --look-for-adds -a -A "test" -m "test"
Finished recording patch 'test'

After that, the modified time of /test/a is 11:40:25 and the modified 
times of /test/_darcs/hashed_inventory and the files it directly or 
indirectly references are all 11:41:32. There's an unreferenced file in 
/test/_darcs/pristine.hashed/, but that has a modified time of 11:38:50 
(which seems to match the creation time for the repo).

I get the same behaviour when a file is simply modified, rather than 
being created. I also get the same behaviour when I use --hashed rather 
than --darcs-2 (and also, again, when the file is simply modified).

> Or maybe there's a bug in the windows-specific code.  I don't know.
> But what you're describing is definitely a bug, since darcs does
> track time stamps.

So I should raise a bug for this? Either way, now might be a good time 
for me (or a colleague) to try to get a working Windows build environment.

Regards,
Grant.
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: darcs2version.txt
Url: http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20081013/eb9c9dd1/attachment-0001.txt 


More information about the darcs-users mailing list