Re: [Gnu-arch-users] question about greedy library and history

[Aaron Bentley]

Johannes Berg wrote:

> Hi,
>
> For testing on win32 I was getting tla--devo--1.3, and I had a greedy,
> non-sparse revision library (NTFS does hardlinks :) ).
>
> Now, I noticed that tla tried to add --1.2 to the library as well, but
> not --1.1. Testing on linux (set $HOME differently to be clean) I
> registered only the 2004 archive, and got the same behaviour.
>
> Now, when I register the 2003b archive to get --1.1 which is the
> ancestor of --1.2, tla doesn't put --1.1 into the library.

You mean when you get 1.2, it doesn't get 1.1?

> I think this logic is flawed -- this seems to be the effect of an
> archive boundary being between the two. What is the reason for this
> behaviour?

Off the top of my head, it's probably related to the presence or absence 
of cached revisions.

1.3 doesn't have any cached revisions, so it's necessary to use 1.2.
1.2 has a cacherev at base-0, so 1.1 isn't needed.

Since cacherevs are automatically created when you tag from one archive 
to another now, you'll tend to see this behaviour at archive boundaries.

I've been focusing on sparse libraries.  Are lots of people using 
non-sparse libraries?

Aaron