You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Paulo da Silva <ps...@esoterica.pt> on 2006/02/26 02:01:40 UTC

Request for a feature

Hi!

I had the following situation:

I have a repository, mostly of binary files.
I created it from a couple of files (rev 0) and then
commited lots of files (rev 1).
I have been using it for a long time so far.

Yesterday, I tried a checkout and got a
checksum mismatch for rev 1!!!

I managed to turn around that, writing a small
python script to change the existing checksum
for the one expected on the file repos/db/revs/1.

Then I did a svnadmin dump, built a new repository
and loaded it with that dump.

A new checkout revealed that only a file was corrupted.

The question or the feature I propose is:

Why not a switch for the "svnadmin dump" that causes
mismatch checksums only being logged (stderr?) and
then ignored (or something better if possible)?

Thank you for any comments on this.

Regards
Paulo


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: Request for a feature

Posted by kf...@collab.net.
Paulo da Silva <ps...@esoterica.pt> writes:
> I had the following situation:
> 
> I have a repository, mostly of binary files.
> I created it from a couple of files (rev 0) and then
> commited lots of files (rev 1).
> I have been using it for a long time so far.
> 
> Yesterday, I tried a checkout and got a
> checksum mismatch for rev 1!!!
> 
> I managed to turn around that, writing a small
> python script to change the existing checksum
> for the one expected on the file repos/db/revs/1.
> 
> Then I did a svnadmin dump, built a new repository
> and loaded it with that dump.
> 
> A new checkout revealed that only a file was corrupted.
> 
> The question or the feature I propose is:
> 
> Why not a switch for the "svnadmin dump" that causes
> mismatch checksums only being logged (stderr?) and
> then ignored (or something better if possible)?
> 
> Thank you for any comments on this.

I think that's a good idea.  When a disk sector goes bad or sometihng,
people inevitable end up doing workarounds like yours.  We might as
well make things easier for them.

Would you like to try writing the patch?  See

  http://subversion.tigris.org/mailing-list-guidelines.html#patches

if so; or if not, let us know.

Thanks,
-Karl

-- 
www.collab.net  <>  CollabNet  |  Distributed Development On Demand

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org