You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Paul Burba <pt...@gmail.com> on 2009/03/01 17:21:31 UTC
Re: 1.6.0-rc3 up for signing/testing
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
<hy...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> 1.6.0-rc3 "Great White" is up for signing and testing, the magic rev
> is r36200.
>
> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.0-rc3/
>
> This is a new code tarball, but does not restart the soak period for
> 1.6.0. Please respond with your signatures and testing information.
>
> [ Insert standard disclaimers here. ]
>
> -Hyrum
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1240833
TESTED:
-------
[ fsfs | bdb ] x [ file | svn | http (neon) | http (serf) ]
JavaHL Bindings
SUCCESSFULLY BUILT BUT NOT TESTED:
----------------------------------
Python Bindings
Perl Bindings
SUMMARY:
--------
+1 to release.
RESULTS:
--------
All pass except as noted below:
[ All combinations ]
XFAIL update_tests.py 32: update wc on the root of a Windows (virtual) drive.
It fails, which we expect, but triggers an SVN_ERR_ASSERT(). The fix
for this is r36049-r36051 and r36131, which are nominated for
inclusion in 1.6.1. This test fails without incident in 1.5.x, but I
am able to get an abort (rather than an SVN_ERR_ASSERT which is new in
1.6) with 1.5.6, so this is not a regression. Also, the situation is
fairly uncommon, you must simultaneously commit multiple WCs whose
common parent is the root of a drive; so the workaround is simple,
commit them individually. Given all this, I don't believe it should
hold up the release.
VERIFIED:
-------
http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.0-rc3/great-white/subversion-1.6.0-rc3.zip:
C:\Downloads\1.6.0.RC3>gpg --verify subversion-1.6.0-rc3.zip.asc
gpg: Signature made 02/27/09 15:05:39 using DSA key ID 4E24517C
gpg: Good signature from "Hyrum K. Wright (Personal) <hy...@hyrumwright.org>"
gpg: aka "Hyrum K. Wright (UT) <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>"
MD5: 02efd53bfaf8ce5287811fa57bfd1246
SHA1: 9ba78f920688a1657647f2ba41c50bd766bca25e
Excepting the expected differences in
subversion/include/svn_version.h, the contents of
subversion-1.6.0-rc3.zip match
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/branches/1.6.x@36200.
PLATFORM:
---------
Microsoft Windows XP Professional Service Pack 3 (Build 2600)
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4400+ 2211.2 Mhz 2 GB RAM
Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 Professional Version 9.0.21022.8 RTM
Microsoft .NET Framework Version 3.5
DEPENDENCIES:
-------------
APR: 1.3.3
APR-UTIL: 1.3.4
Neon: 0.28.2
zlib: 1.2.3
OpenSSL: 0.9.8h
Apache: 2.2.10
BDB: 4.7.25
sqlite: 3.6.10
Python: ActivePython 2.6.1.1
java: 1.6.0_07
swig: 1.3.36
serf: trunk@1218
SIGNATURE:
-----------
user: "Paul T. Burba <pt...@gmail.com>"
1024-bit DSA key, ID 53FCDC55, created 2006-06-21
http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.0-rc3/great-white/subversion-1.6.0-rc3.zip:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
iD8DBQBJqsAu2RaJMFP83FURAhI/AJwK6Y/mKmReVfnbhr/mQkdMlVCiIACeIAZs
RhKlSgwvrCl2iCB8sG3j8nU=
=qphk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Paul
P.S. Hyrum, do you any preference as to how we include our sigs -- Is
an attachment preferable to including it in the body? Since you deal
with a whole lot of these (especially lately!) whatever is easiest for
you.
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1251381
RE: 1.6.0-rc3 up for signing/testing
Posted by Bert Huijben <rh...@sharpsvn.net>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geoff Rowell [mailto:geoff.rowell@varolii.com]
> Sent: maandag 2 maart 2009 15:40
> To: Paul Burba
> Cc: dev@subversion.tigris.org; Hyrum K. Wright
> Subject: RE: 1.6.0-rc3 up for signing/testing
>
> On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Paul Burba <pt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > XFAIL update_tests.py 32: update wc on the root of a Windows (virtual)
> drive.
> >
> > It fails, which we expect, but triggers an SVN_ERR_ASSERT(). The fix
> > for this is r36049-r36051 and r36131, which are nominated for
> > inclusion in 1.6.1. This test fails without incident in 1.5.x, but I
> > am able to get an abort (rather than an SVN_ERR_ASSERT which is new in
> > 1.6) with 1.5.6, so this is not a regression. Also, the situation is
> > fairly uncommon, you must simultaneously commit multiple WCs whose
> > common parent is the root of a drive; so the workaround is simple,
> > commit them individually. Given all this, I don't believe it should
> > hold up the release.
> >
> No desire to hold up the release train, but this is rather more common
than
> you think. Our Windows developers build off of a "subst" K: drive. the
source
> tree includes externals in the top level and in the next few levels.
>
> Committing from "K:\" triggers this.
Hi,
At this time I can't make a promise on this, but I'm trying to fix all/most
of the windows drive root issues for 1.7. (And I had this specific example
working on my pc)
Fixing this issue requires invasive changes through all our libraries
(especially libsvn_wc and libsvn_client), so it is impossible to get these
fixes in 1.6 as just another bugfix.
(The assertion will probably be replaced by a normal error in 1.6.1 if it
gets enough votes in time).
Thanks,
Bert
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1256605
RE: 1.6.0-rc3 up for signing/testing
Posted by Geoff Rowell <ge...@varolii.com>.
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Paul Burba <pt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> XFAIL update_tests.py 32: update wc on the root of a Windows (virtual) drive.
>
> It fails, which we expect, but triggers an SVN_ERR_ASSERT(). The fix
> for this is r36049-r36051 and r36131, which are nominated for
> inclusion in 1.6.1. This test fails without incident in 1.5.x, but I
> am able to get an abort (rather than an SVN_ERR_ASSERT which is new in
> 1.6) with 1.5.6, so this is not a regression. Also, the situation is
> fairly uncommon, you must simultaneously commit multiple WCs whose
> common parent is the root of a drive; so the workaround is simple,
> commit them individually. Given all this, I don't believe it should
> hold up the release.
>
No desire to hold up the release train, but this is rather more common than
you think. Our Windows developers build off of a "subst" K: drive. the source
tree includes externals in the top level and in the next few levels.
Committing from "K:\" triggers this.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender.
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1256567
Re: 1.6.0-rc3 up for signing/testing
Posted by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>.
On Mar 1, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
>
> P.S. Hyrum, do you any preference as to how we include our sigs -- Is
> an attachment preferable to including it in the body? Since you deal
> with a whole lot of these (especially lately!) whatever is easiest for
> you.
Actually, including it in the body (left justified) is the best right
now. One of the longer parts of the post-signature release process is
me copying and pasting all the signatures into one file and then
verifying them. In an Ideal World, I could put some kind of upload
script on the server which allows folks to just enter their sigs,
verifies and collect them. One of these days...
-Hyrum
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1256338