[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Error while checking out the elpa branch
From: |
Tassilo Horn |
Subject: |
Error while checking out the elpa branch |
Date: |
Mon, 12 Nov 2012 12:30:23 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.130006 (Ma Gnus v0.6) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
Hi all,
[I've started this mail as a question, but while writing I got aware
that the problem isn't my fault. So no questions here, just "FYI".]
I've just wanted to setup the emacs dev workspace on some machine as
documented on http://emacswiki.org/emacs/BzrForEmacsDevs. When checking
out the elpa branch, I got an assertion error in bzr.
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
% bzr init-repo emacs
Shared repository with trees (format: 2a)
Location:
shared repository: emacs
% cd emacs
% bzr branch bzr+ssh://address@hidden/emacs/trunk trunk
Branched 110872 revisions.
% bzr branch bzr+ssh://address@hidden/emacs/elpa elpa
bzr: ERROR: exceptions.AssertionError: ('not present: %r', StaticTuple('', '',
'TREE_ROOT'))
Traceback (most recent call last): ...
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
It turns out, the issue is known for more than a year.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/830947
There's a patch available since a few months at
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~rrw/bzr/830947-tree-root-exception/revision/6538
Using that bzr version, I can get the elpa branch without errors.
The contents of the emacs/elpa directory seem to be identical between
the one checked out with bzr 2.5.1 with error, and the version checked
out with the bzr/830947-tree-root-exception branch. However, there are
differences in emacs/.bzr/.
I've asked in the bug report if it's safe to work on the elpa branch
using bzr 2.5.1 once you've checked it out initially using the
830947-tree-root-exception branch. (Maybe it's also ok to just ignore
the error. Who knows...)
Oh, and Stefan also reported this bug in February:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/937101
Status: confirmed, Importance: Low
Low importance, seriously? Am I a bit too sensitive in that this
doesn't really boost my trust in bzr?
I've added a link to the older report as Stefan's report seems to be a
duplicate. And the older one is of High Importance with a fix (which
might or might not be correct), so hopefully it'll find it's way into
the mainline anytime soon.
Bye,
Tassilo
- Error while checking out the elpa branch,
Tassilo Horn <=