[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
FW: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho ul
From: |
Reinstein, Shlomo |
Subject: |
FW: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho uld have ! |
Date: |
Mon, 24 Feb 2003 13:49:17 +0200 |
I've just compiled and tried CVS 1.11.5 -- same behavior. Up-to-date check
does not work correctly when using client/server.
Shlomo
-----Original Message-----
From: Reinstein, Shlomo
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 12:49 PM
To: Guus Leeuw jr.
Cc: address@hidden
Subject: RE: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it
sho uld have !
This happened with 1.10.8 and also with 1.11.1p1. No related fix has been
mentioned in the news file for CVS versions 1.12-1.15.
Shlomo
-----Original Message-----
From: Guus Leeuw jr. [mailto:address@hidden
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 12:07 PM
To: Reinstein, Shlomo
Cc: address@hidden
Subject: AW: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it
sho uld have !
Shlomo,
Which version was this? 1.11.5? Or the older version?
Cheers,
Guus
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: address@hidden
[mailto:address@hidden Im Auftrag von
Reinstein, Shlomo
Gesendet: zondag 23 februari 2003 9:24
An: Eric Siegerman; address@hidden
Betreff: RE: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it
sho uld have !
Hi,
I have ran the test with the repo local to the CVS server, and it shows the
same behavior. Which brings me to the conclusion that the client/server
protocol does not function as expected. Here's the scenario: (Can be done by
the same user on the same machine)
[ rest snipped ]
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.455 / Virus Database: 255 - Release Date: 13/02/2003
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
address@hidden
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
- Re: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho uld have !, (continued)
- Re: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho uld have !, Kaz Kylheku, 2003/02/18
- RE: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho uld have !, Reinstein, Shlomo, 2003/02/18
- RE: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho uld have !, Ludvig Borgne, 2003/02/19
- RE: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho uld have !, Fabian Cenedese, 2003/02/19
- RE: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho uld have !, Reinstein, Shlomo, 2003/02/23
- RE: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho uld have !, Reinstein, Shlomo, 2003/02/23
- FW: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it sho uld have !,
Reinstein, Shlomo <=