Re: [Gnu-arch-users] PANIC: Top-of-file arch tag crosses 1k boundary

[Robert Collins]

On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 14:03 -0400, James Blackwell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 14:01 +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> > I can think of one thing, which I overlooked initially - Panicing, while
> > the right thing to do to prevent unexpected A+D pairs for folk, breaks
> > the ability to check out code created while truncation was allowed.
> >
> > I'm inclined to think that we want to resurrect truncation while doing a
> > 'tla get'.
> 
> We can get the same behavior by performing the following:
> 
> 1. today, change the panic into a stderr warning that support for 
>    this truncated id is going away
> 
> 2. in  1.2.2 < x < 1.3.0 we turn the stderr back into a panic.

This won't suffice: that means that code /in archives today/ that has
truncated id's won't be able to be checked out by 1.3.0. The use of a
panic vs warning today won't change this in any meaningful way. That
said, I still think that a panic rather than a warning is more useful:
it demands correction, rather than allowing it.

Rob

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part