| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fscking a remote is now supported. It's done by retrieving
the contents of the specified files from the remote, and checking them,
so can be an expensive operation.
(Several optimisations are possible, to speed it up, of course.. This is
the slow and stupid remote fsck to start with.)
Still, if the remote is a special remote, or a git repository that you
cannot run fsck in locally, it's nice to have the ability to fsck it.
If you have any directory special remotes, now would be a good time to
fsck them, in case you were hit by the data loss bug fixed in the
previous release!
|
|
|
|
| |
This way it's clear when a backend does not implement its own fsck checks.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When moving a file to the remote failed, and partially transferred content
was left behind in the directory, re-running the same move would think it
succeeded and delete the local copy.
I reproduced data loss when moving files to a partition that was almost
full. Interrupting a transfer could have similar results.
Easily fixed by using a temp file which is then moved atomically into place
once the transfer completes.
I've audited other calls to copyFileExternal, and other special remote
file transfer code; everything else seems to use temp files correctly
(rsync, git), or otherwise use atomic transfers (bup, S3).
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
forum/__91__Installation__93___There_is_no_available_version_of_quickcheck_that_satisfies___62____61__2.1.mdwn to forum/__91__Installation__93___base-3.0.3.2_requires_syb___61____61__0.1.0.2_however_syb-0.1.0.2_was_excluded_because_json-0.5_requires_syb___62____61__0.3.3.mdwn
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
bugs/__91__Installation__93___There_is_no_available_version_of_quickcheck_that_satisfies___62____61__2.1.mdwn to forum/__91__Installation__93___There_is_no_available_version_of_quickcheck_that_satisfies___62____61__2.1.mdwn
|
| |
|
|\ |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|/
|
|
| |
kills that ugly python message during build
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|\ |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This way, the build log will indicate whether StatFS can be relied on.
I've tested all the failing architectures now, and on all of them,
the StatFS code now returns Nothing, rather than Just nonsense.
Also, if annex.diskreserve is set on a platform where StatFS is not
working, git-annex will complain.
Also, the Makefile was missing the sources target used when building with
cabal.
|
|/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
git-annex FTBFS on s390, mips, powerpc, sparc. That StatFS code is failing
on all of them. At least on s390, the failure appears as:
Just (FileSystemStats {fsStatBlockSize = 4096, fsStatBlockCount = 0,
fsStatByteCount = 0, fsStatBytesFree = 0, fsStatBytesAvailable = 0,
fsStatBytesUsed = 0})
While I don't understand why this is happening, or how to fix it,
bandaid over it by checking for obviously bad values and returning Nothing.
That disables disk free space checking, but at least git-annex will work.
Upstream bug: http://code.google.com/p/xmobar/issues/detail?id=70
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Up to one per file processed.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|\ |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|/ |
|
| |
|
|\ |
|
| |
| |
| |
| | |
not holding my breath on this one..
|
|/ |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Note that GIT_WORK_TREE cannot influence GIT_DIR; that is necessary for
git-fake-bare and vcsh type things to work.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|