[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: hg repo corruption: ".hgsubstate is corrupt in revision ..."
From: |
Andrew Janke |
Subject: |
Re: hg repo corruption: ".hgsubstate is corrupt in revision ..." |
Date: |
Thu, 28 Mar 2019 03:49:28 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 |
On 3/28/19 3:15 AM, Mike Miller wrote:
> I don't know how well versed you are in Hg, but one big difference with
> Git is that branches are permanent, like SVN. Use bookmarks instead, the
> effect is roughly similar to Git topic branches.
Did not know that. I'll read up on Hg bookmarks.
So I tried bisecting, first once, then twice, and I finally got a
successful push by pushing the first ¼ of the revisions on the default
branch
hg push -r d5d6a670f137 new
Cool! What was the code you used to do the bisecting? I'm working on a
similar thing, and my solution in progress is rather ungainly.
https://github.com/apjanke/rebuild-octave-repo
I kept pushing ¼ at a time and got the whole history pushed in 4 batches
of ~6500 changesets each, plus one more for stray side branches
hg push --new-branch -r 2e4252228f73 new
hg push --new-branch -r 6cfbf412a2c3 new
hg push --new-branch -r @ new
hg push --force -r "public()" new
hg push -B @ new
>
If you try that, maybe you'll have better luck pushing the whole history
in batches. Maybe Bitbucket can't handle the size of our repository all
at once? Maybe it has a post-receive hook that is timing out on such a
huge number of changesets? I really don't know.
Ha! It worked! Thank you!
I have to say after a few years of using Hg on Bitbucket off and on,
it's really not pleasant. I've found quite a few rough edges. Enough to
make me not want to use it for collaboration again.
Are there any better options for Hg? I"m not up for hosting my own
publicly-visible repo.
Thanks for figuring out how to fix this for me! This will make my Octave
work easier.
Cheers,
Andrew