[darcs-users] [patch262] Resolve issue1014: mark the test as pass... (and 4 more)

Eric Kow kowey at darcs.net
Thu Jun 3 22:22:15 UTC 2010


On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 15:32:43 +0000, Petr Ročkai wrote:
> these are mostly test wibbling. May need some review though. Also, the last
> patch would certainly benefit from a test run on a case-insensitive system.

Hmm, sorry to sit on this (probably this weekend).

It's certainly nice to see these being moved out (and not just
forgotten), but I'd like to read a little more on the tracker.

(If you're feeling impatient, feel free to just apply them)

> Thu Jun  3 14:29:57 CEST 2010  Petr Rockai <me at mornfall.net>
>   * Resolve issue1014: mark the test as passing. Likely addressed by NewSet.

I find this a bit too good to be true... but here's David's patch
* resolve issue1014: use merge_them in pull

I can understand that the bug in get_extra just goes away in the NewSet
work.  But is the fundamental bug solved actually solved, or has it
swept under the rug?  

The wiki says that bug in get_extra happens when 

  This bug is triggered if for whatever reason Darcs finds itself in a position
  where a patch which is shared by both repos appears to depend on a patch
  which is local to one of them only. Such a dependency would be absurd. We can
  divide this error into three known cases:
  
  1. Darcs thinks a patch is shared, but it's actually local to one of the repositories
  2. The contrary: Darcs mistakenly believes a shared patch is local
  3. There is a real dependency and it indicates a deep Darcs bug (see issue1014)

Sorry if that's in confusing kowey-language.  Anyway the point is that
issue1014 is one of the few cases where the bug in get_extra really is
legitimate and not just some incidental nonsense thing like an encoding
problem.

So I'm a bit surprised that it's just been fixed like that, since it's about
the duplicate patch shenanigans.  If we're not making error messages anymore,
then it almost sounds like we just need to be testing more aggressively to
reveal the real problem.  :-/

Hmm!  Hopefully you'll come back to me with a sort of "ah, but NewSet *does*
fundamentally address these issues because X Y and Z" and I'll just apply these
patches and be happy.

> Thu Jun  3 14:31:33 CEST 2010  Petr Rockai <me at mornfall.net>
>   * Resolve issue1337: mark the test as passing. Likely addressed by noslurps.

Will read about this later.
 
> Thu Jun  3 14:34:00 CEST 2010  Petr Rockai <me at mornfall.net>
>   * Resolve issue1401: mark the test as passing. Likely fixed by NewSet.
> 
> Thu Jun  3 14:37:18 CEST 2010  Petr Rockai <me at mornfall.net>
>   * Resolve issue1610: mark the test as passing. Likely fixed by NewSet.

I'm less concerned about these, but would like to read more about NewSet and
get_extra sometime

> Thu Jun  3 14:37:35 CEST 2010  Petr Rockai <me at mornfall.net>
>   * Skip the case folding test on case-sensitive systems.

I confirm that this still runs (and fails) on my Mac

-- 
Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20100603/c8e41752/attachment-0001.pgp>


More information about the darcs-users mailing list