"Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file"

[Victor Sudakov]

Colleagues,

I cvsup the FreeBSD CVS repository daily from cvsup.ru.freebsd.org.
Both the client and the server run CVSup Software version: SNAP_16_1h,
Protocol version: 17.0.

Recently I noticed that there are lots of messages
"Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" about all kinds of
downloaded files, e.g.

src/lib/libc/posix1e/acl_delete_entry.c,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
Bad version saved in /var/ncvs/src/lib/libc/posix1e/#cvs.cvsup-54795.92

When I diff the files, I see the following:

*** #cvs.cvsup-54795.92 2009-12-31 05:15:13.000000000 +0600
--- acl_delete_entry.c,v 2009-12-30 22:38:19.000000000 +0600
***************
*** 108,128 ****
branches;
next ;

- 1.7.24.1
- date 2008.10.02.02.57.24; author kensmith; state Exp;
- branches;
- next ;
-
- 1.7.26.1
- date 2008.11.25.02.59.29; author kensmith; state Exp;
- branches;
- next ;
-
- 1.7.28.1
- date 2009.04.15.03.14.26; author kensmith; state Exp;
- branches;
- next ;
-
1.8.2.1
date 2009.08.03.08.13.06; author kensmith; state Exp;
branches
--- 108,113 ----
***************
*** 139,144 ****
--- 124,144 ----
branches;
next ;

+ 1.7.24.1
+ date 2008.10.02.02.57.24; author kensmith; state Exp;
+ branches;
+ next ;
+
+ 1.7.26.1
+ date 2008.11.25.02.59.29; author kensmith; state Exp;
+ branches;
+ next ;
+
+ 1.7.28.1
+ date 2009.04.15.03.14.26; author kensmith; state Exp;
+ branches;
+ next ;
+

desc
@@
***************
*** 604,606 ****
--- 604,607 ----
d32 1
d34 1
@
+

which probably means:

1. There is an extra newline near the end of the RCS file.

2. The changes in the file are the same but placed in different
positions in the file? Not where cvsup expects the changes to be?

I was told this may be an artifact of importing changes in svn back
into cvs. Something goes wrong during the import, perhaps changes are
inserted in the wrong place in the RCS file. Is this problem known,
are there plans to fix it? Is svn2cvs used or something else?

--
Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
sip:sud...@sibptus.tomsk.ru
_______________________________________________
freebsd...@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hacke...@freebsd.org"

[Dimitry Andric]

On 2009-12-31 04:32, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> I cvsup the FreeBSD CVS repository daily from cvsup.ru.freebsd.org.
> Both the client and the server run CVSup Software version: SNAP_16_1h,
> Protocol version: 17.0.
>
> Recently I noticed that there are lots of messages
> "Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" about all kinds of
> downloaded files, e.g.
>
>
> src/lib/libc/posix1e/acl_delete_entry.c,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file

I also see a bunch of these, almost every time I do a csup. Looking
back in my logs, I see that it goes back until at least 2009-07-05...

[Matthias Andree]

Am 31.12.2009, 16:45 Uhr, schrieb Dimitry Andric <dim...@andric.com>:

> On 2009-12-31 04:32, Victor Sudakov wrote:
>> I cvsup the FreeBSD CVS repository daily from cvsup.ru.freebsd.org.
>> Both the client and the server run CVSup Software version: SNAP_16_1h,
>> Protocol version: 17.0.
>>
>> Recently I noticed that there are lots of messages
>> "Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" about all kinds of
>> downloaded files, e.g.
>>
>>
>> src/lib/libc/posix1e/acl_delete_entry.c,v: Checksum mismatch -- will
>> transfer entire file
>
> I also see a bunch of these, almost every time I do a csup. Looking
> back in my logs, I see that it goes back until at least 2009-07-05...

I suspect (without any proof) that this is only for src, because that is
converted from a live SVN repository to CVS for the sake of CVSup
distribution, while all other repositories are still CVS natively.

--
Matthias Andree

[Victor Sudakov]

Matthias Andree wrote:
>
> >>I cvsup the FreeBSD CVS repository daily from cvsup.ru.freebsd.org.
> >>Both the client and the server run CVSup Software version: SNAP_16_1h,
> >>Protocol version: 17.0.
> >>
> >>Recently I noticed that there are lots of messages
> >>"Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" about all kinds of
> >>downloaded files, e.g.
> >>
> >>
> >>src/lib/libc/posix1e/acl_delete_entry.c,v: Checksum mismatch -- will
> >>transfer entire file
> >
> >I also see a bunch of these, almost every time I do a csup. Looking
> >back in my logs, I see that it goes back until at least 2009-07-05...
>
> I suspect (without any proof) that this is only for src, because that is
> converted from a live SVN repository to CVS for the sake of CVSup
> distribution, while all other repositories are still CVS natively.

Doesn't this mean that the SVN to CVS conversion is somewhat broken?
It is done for the sake of CVSup and CVSup is not happy with it.

--
Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
sip:sud...@sibptus.tomsk.ru

[Dimitry Andric]

On 2010-01-03 01:15, Matthias Andree wrote:
> I suspect (without any proof) that this is only for src, because that is
> converted from a live SVN repository to CVS for the sake of CVSup
> distribution, while all other repositories are still CVS natively.

Every now and then, I also see a file from ports corrupted:

ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
projects/pkgtools/bin/pkgdb,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
projects/pkgtools/bin/portupgrade,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
projects/pkgtools/NEWS,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
projects/pkgtools/bin/portupgrade,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
projects/pkgtools/lib/pkgmisc.rb,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
projects/pkgtools/lib/pkgtools.rb,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
projects/pkgtools/bin/portupgrade,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
projects/pkgtools/bin/portupgrade,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file

This was grepped through the last few months. Are any of these specific
files 'imported' from svn, by any chance?

[Doug Barton]

I was not going to reply on this thread at all, but the amount of
random speculation has now reached a pathological level.

The spurious new line at the end of a file has nothing to do with svn,
it is an artifact of how the file was originally transferred to the
cvsup mirror. The checksum mismatch will be triggered a few different
ways, the most common is to switch between cvsup and csup, and/or
switching mirrors for the same checked out tree.

The message is harmless, it's not an error, and in fact you can take
the message as a reassuring sign that the system is working exactly as
designed. :)

Now let's move on,

Doug

--

Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/

Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso

[Victor Sudakov]

Dimitry Andric wrote:
> >I suspect (without any proof) that this is only for src, because that is
> >converted from a live SVN repository to CVS for the sake of CVSup
> >distribution, while all other repositories are still CVS natively.
>
> Every now and then, I also see a file from ports corrupted:
>
> ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file
> ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk,v: Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file

[dd]

>
> This was grepped through the last few months. Are any of these specific
> files 'imported' from svn, by any chance?

I also see that many "changes" in the CVS seem to be useless: there
are no changes other than file version increments.

--
Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
sip:sud...@sibptus.tomsk.ru

[Victor Sudakov]

Doug Barton wrote:
> I was not going to reply on this thread at all, but the amount of
> random speculation has now reached a pathological level.
>
> The spurious new line at the end of a file has nothing to do with svn,
> it is an artifact of how the file was originally transferred to the
> cvsup mirror.

My mirror was created from scratch by cvsup. What artifacts are you
talking about?

> The checksum mismatch will be triggered a few different
> ways, the most common is to switch between cvsup and csup, and/or
> switching mirrors for the same checked out tree.

I am afraid you are mistaken. I have never switched between cvsup and
csup. I have even recreated a mirror from scratch, and the "Checksum
mismatch" error appears at the next run of cvsup.

>
> The message is harmless, it's not an error, and in fact you can take
> the message as a reassuring sign that the system is working exactly as
> designed. :)

Except for the fact that the -L0 switch has become completely useless.
All the "Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" are L0
messages, i.e. they ARE error messages.

--
Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
sip:sud...@sibptus.tomsk.ru

[Stephen Montgomery-Smith]

Doug Barton wrote:
> I was not going to reply on this thread at all, but the amount of
> random speculation has now reached a pathological level.
>
> The spurious new line at the end of a file has nothing to do with svn,
> it is an artifact of how the file was originally transferred to the
> cvsup mirror. The checksum mismatch will be triggered a few different
> ways, the most common is to switch between cvsup and csup, and/or
> switching mirrors for the same checked out tree.
>
> The message is harmless, it's not an error, and in fact you can take
> the message as a reassuring sign that the system is working exactly as
> designed. :)
>

I tend to agree with Victor that there is something more going on. I
started getting these messages at about the same time as svn was introduced.

[Peter Jeremy]

On 2010-Jan-03 21:45:03 +0600, Victor Sudakov <sudakov...@sibptus.tomsk.ru> wrote:
>I also see that many "changes" in the CVS seem to be useless: there
>are no changes other than file version increments.

SVN metadata changes will appear in CVS as version changes only. The
most obvious/common case is branching - branching a native CVS repo
just adds the branch tags. Branching a SVN repo replicates the tree
and the SVN->CVS exporter turns the branch into a commit that touches
each affected file.

--
Peter Jeremy

[Victor Sudakov]

Peter Jeremy wrote:
> >I also see that many "changes" in the CVS seem to be useless: there
> >are no changes other than file version increments.
>
> SVN metadata changes will appear in CVS as version changes only. The
> most obvious/common case is branching - branching a native CVS repo
> just adds the branch tags. Branching a SVN repo replicates the tree
> and the SVN->CVS exporter turns the branch into a commit that touches
> each affected file.

Thank you for the insight into theory, however the practical results
are annoying. For example, running mergemaster has become a nightmare.
It considers every file to be changed (unless you do some black magic
with DIFF_OPTIONS to ignore \$FreeBSD:.*\$).

BTW what does cvsup (in CVS mode) do with an RCS file to which only a
branch tag has been added? How does it mirror such a change? Just
curious.

[Erik Trulsson]

On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 07:03:16PM +0600, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Peter Jeremy wrote:
> > >I also see that many "changes" in the CVS seem to be useless: there
> > >are no changes other than file version increments.
> >
> > SVN metadata changes will appear in CVS as version changes only. The
> > most obvious/common case is branching - branching a native CVS repo
> > just adds the branch tags. Branching a SVN repo replicates the tree
> > and the SVN->CVS exporter turns the branch into a commit that touches
> > each affected file.
>
> Thank you for the insight into theory, however the practical results
> are annoying. For example, running mergemaster has become a nightmare.
> It considers every file to be changed (unless you do some black magic
> with DIFF_OPTIONS to ignore \$FreeBSD:.*\$).

Or if you use mergemaster's -F flag which seems to exist for exactly this
type of situation.

>
> BTW what does cvsup (in CVS mode) do with an RCS file to which only a
> branch tag has been added? How does it mirror such a change? Just
> curious.

It will add the tag to the file of course. (In CVS tags are stored inside
each RCS file.)

--
<Insert your favourite quote here.>
Erik Trulsson
ertr...@student.uu.se

[Victor Sudakov]

Erik Trulsson wrote:
> > > SVN metadata changes will appear in CVS as version changes only. The
> > > most obvious/common case is branching - branching a native CVS repo
> > > just adds the branch tags. Branching a SVN repo replicates the tree
> > > and the SVN->CVS exporter turns the branch into a commit that touches
> > > each affected file.

[dd]

> > BTW what does cvsup (in CVS mode) do with an RCS file to which only a
> > branch tag has been added? How does it mirror such a change? Just
> > curious.
>
> It will add the tag to the file of course. (In CVS tags are stored inside
> each RCS file.)

So, branching a native CVS repo would still produce a massive change
and download of RCS files by cvsup?

--
Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
sip:sud...@sibptus.tomsk.ru

[Victor Sudakov]

Erik Trulsson wrote:
> > Peter Jeremy wrote:
> > > >I also see that many "changes" in the CVS seem to be useless: there
> > > >are no changes other than file version increments.
> > >
> > > SVN metadata changes will appear in CVS as version changes only. The
> > > most obvious/common case is branching - branching a native CVS repo
> > > just adds the branch tags. Branching a SVN repo replicates the tree
> > > and the SVN->CVS exporter turns the branch into a commit that touches
> > > each affected file.
> >
> > Thank you for the insight into theory, however the practical results
> > are annoying. For example, running mergemaster has become a nightmare.
> > It considers every file to be changed (unless you do some black magic
> > with DIFF_OPTIONS to ignore \$FreeBSD:.*\$).
>
> Or if you use mergemaster's -F flag which seems to exist for exactly this
> type of situation.

AFAIK it was not available before RELENG_7_2.

--
Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
sip:sud...@sibptus.tomsk.ru

[Peter Jeremy]

On 2010-Jan-04 20:37:49 +0600, Victor Sudakov <sudakov...@sibptus.tomsk.ru> wrote:

>Erik Trulsson wrote:
>> It will add the tag to the file of course. (In CVS tags are stored inside
>> each RCS file.)

Actually, FreeBSD's CVS checkin scripts were hacked many years ago to
unexpand $FreeBSD$ on checkin so that the actual repo "text" part just
includes $FreeBSD$ and doesn't update on each checkin.

>So, branching a native CVS repo would still produce a massive change
>and download of RCS files by cvsup?

Yes - because the RCS file includes all the metadata - ie tags. This
is very visible when (eg) the ports tree is tagged.

--
Peter Jeremy

[Victor Sudakov]

Peter Jeremy wrote:
>
> >So, branching a native CVS repo would still produce a massive change
> >and download of RCS files by cvsup?
>
> Yes - because the RCS file includes all the metadata - ie tags. This
> is very visible when (eg) the ports tree is tagged.

Then I fail to understand the difference between the effects of native CVS
branching and SVN branching with subsequent export into CVS, from the point of
view of cvsup:

> > > SVN metadata changes will appear in CVS as version changes only. The
> > > most obvious/common case is branching - branching a native CVS repo
> > > just adds the branch tags. Branching a SVN repo replicates the tree
> > > and the SVN->CVS exporter turns the branch into a commit that touches
> > > each affected file.

In both cases, the affected files are touched, changed and downloaded by
cvsup, i.e. we have a massive download of all files after branching.

But to hell with this. I started the topic because I think something
is wrong with SVN to CVS export, which upsets cvsup and causes
"Checksum mismatch" errors. Is anybody willing to look at it?

[Eygene Ryabinkin]

Victor, good day.

Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 09:32:44AM +0600, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> I cvsup the FreeBSD CVS repository daily from cvsup.ru.freebsd.org.
> Both the client and the server run CVSup Software version: SNAP_16_1h,
> Protocol version: 17.0.
>
> Recently I noticed that there are lots of messages
> "Checksum mismatch -- will transfer entire file" about all kinds of
> downloaded files, e.g.

http://old.nabble.com/CVSup-src-file-Edits-almost-alway-triggering-Checksum-mismatch-and-Fixup-td24980888.html

Seems like you're facing the same problem. Simon Nielsen had described
its origins, but it seems that the thread is currently dead.
--
Eygene
_ ___ _.--. #
\`.|\..----...-'` `-._.-'_.-'` # Remember that it is hard
/ ' ` , __.--' # to read the on-line manual
)/' _/ \ `-_, / # while single-stepping the kernel.
`-'" `"\_ ,_.-;_.-\_ ', fsc/as #
_.-'_./ {_.' ; / # -- FreeBSD Developers handbook
{_.-``-' {_/ #

[Stephen Montgomery-Smith]

Victor Sudakov wrote:

> But to hell with this. I started the topic because I think something
> is wrong with SVN to CVS export, which upsets cvsup and causes
> "Checksum mismatch" errors. Is anybody willing to look at it?

I second Victor's request.

[jhell]

On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 08:32, stephen@ wrote:
> Victor Sudakov wrote:
>
>> But to hell with this. I started the topic because I think something
>> is wrong with SVN to CVS export, which upsets cvsup and causes
>> "Checksum mismatch" errors. Is anybody willing to look at it?
>
> I second Victor's request.
>

Though I support the request for fixing things that pose a possible
problem and it is also a problem(maybe) I see on my end, I would really
like to see this move forward and merge what we have now from CVS -> SVN
and stop backpedaling commits so we can gain some resources back for the
cluster.

If this can be done I will donate whatever time I can to help assist with
the move.

--

Thu Jan 7 12:51:49 2010

jhell

[Victor Sudakov]

Victor Sudakov wrote:

[dd]

>
> But to hell with this. I started the topic because I think something
> is wrong with SVN to CVS export, which upsets cvsup and causes
> "Checksum mismatch" errors. Is anybody willing to look at it?

I see nobody is ever going to fix this? Cvsup mails me a bunch of
"Checksum mismatch" errors on every run, with a risk of overlooking
real errors.

How do others deal with this noise? Do you grep cvsup output or what?

[Gary Jennejohn]

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 11:43:08 +0700
Victor Sudakov <sudakov...@sibptus.tomsk.ru> wrote:

> Victor Sudakov wrote:
>
> [dd]
>
> >
> > But to hell with this. I started the topic because I think something
> > is wrong with SVN to CVS export, which upsets cvsup and causes
> > "Checksum mismatch" errors. Is anybody willing to look at it?
>
> I see nobody is ever going to fix this? Cvsup mails me a bunch of
> "Checksum mismatch" errors on every run, with a risk of overlooking
> real errors.
>
> How do others deal with this noise? Do you grep cvsup output or what?
>

I just ignore these errors. I've never seen a problem as a result.

--
Gary Jennejohn

[Christian Weisgerber]

Victor Sudakov <sudakov...@sibptus.tomsk.ru> wrote:

> I see nobody is ever going to fix this? Cvsup mails me a bunch of
> "Checksum mismatch" errors on every run, with a risk of overlooking
> real errors.

It is particularly egregious when a tag is laid down, like today.
csup(1) ends up refetching a big chunk of the tree from scratch
because so many files have these spurious checksum mismatches.
Personally, I don't care too much, but quite a bit of mirror bandwidth
is wasted this way.

> How do others deal with this noise? Do you grep cvsup output or what?

I optimistically assume that there are no real errors and I run
csup without -s once a week or so, just in case.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de

[Victor Sudakov]

Jonathan Noack wrote:
> >> But to hell with this. I started the topic because I think something
> >> is wrong with SVN to CVS export, which upsets cvsup and causes
> >> "Checksum mismatch" errors. Is anybody willing to look at it?
> >
> > I see nobody is ever going to fix this? Cvsup mails me a bunch of
> > "Checksum mismatch" errors on every run, with a risk of overlooking
> > real errors.
> >
> > How do others deal with this noise? Do you grep cvsup output or what?
>

> Seems like newer versions of CVS break assumptions made by CVSup on the
> ordering of branch revisions:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hubs/2009-August/002083.html
>
> "So, in short I don't see any easy solutions to this, and especially given
> the fact that in the long run CVS/CVSup will probably be replaced by
> something else for distributing FreeBSD source, I don't think it will be
> that easy to find someone to "fix" either CVSup or CVS."

Thanks for the link. Somebody wrote here that the problem was perhaps
in the svn2cvs script, but Simon's post gives a different outlook.

Maybe nobody is going to fix CVSup (is it not actively developed
already?), but csup is relatively recent and alive. Once it has a CVS
mode, maybe it could be adjusted?

[Jonathan Noack]

On Mon, June 14, 2010 00:43, Victor Sudakov wrote:

> Victor Sudakov wrote:
>> But to hell with this. I started the topic because I think something
>> is wrong with SVN to CVS export, which upsets cvsup and causes
>> "Checksum mismatch" errors. Is anybody willing to look at it?
>
> I see nobody is ever going to fix this? Cvsup mails me a bunch of
> "Checksum mismatch" errors on every run, with a risk of overlooking
> real errors.
>
> How do others deal with this noise? Do you grep cvsup output or what?

Seems like newer versions of CVS break assumptions made by CVSup on the

ordering of branch revisions:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hubs/2009-August/002083.html

"So, in short I don't see any easy solutions to this, and especially given
the fact that in the long run CVS/CVSup will probably be replaced by
something else for distributing FreeBSD source, I don't think it will be
that easy to find someone to "fix" either CVSup or CVS."

-Jon

[Gary Jennejohn]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 09:28:37 +0700
Victor Sudakov <sudakov...@sibptus.tomsk.ru> wrote:

> Jonathan Noack wrote:
> > >> But to hell with this. I started the topic because I think something
> > >> is wrong with SVN to CVS export, which upsets cvsup and causes
> > >> "Checksum mismatch" errors. Is anybody willing to look at it?
> > >
> > > I see nobody is ever going to fix this? Cvsup mails me a bunch of
> > > "Checksum mismatch" errors on every run, with a risk of overlooking
> > > real errors.
> > >
> > > How do others deal with this noise? Do you grep cvsup output or what?
> >
> > Seems like newer versions of CVS break assumptions made by CVSup on the
> > ordering of branch revisions:
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hubs/2009-August/002083.html
> >
> > "So, in short I don't see any easy solutions to this, and especially given
> > the fact that in the long run CVS/CVSup will probably be replaced by
> > something else for distributing FreeBSD source, I don't think it will be
> > that easy to find someone to "fix" either CVSup or CVS."
>
> Thanks for the link. Somebody wrote here that the problem was perhaps
> in the svn2cvs script, but Simon's post gives a different outlook.
>
> Maybe nobody is going to fix CVSup (is it not actively developed
> already?), but csup is relatively recent and alive. Once it has a CVS
> mode, maybe it could be adjusted?
>

csup already has a CVS mode, at least in 9-current. I don't use older
versions of FreeBSD so I don't know whether it supports CVS there.

--
Gary Jennejohn

[Christian Weisgerber]

Gary Jennejohn <gljen...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> csup already has a CVS mode, at least in 9-current. I don't use older
> versions of FreeBSD so I don't know whether it supports CVS there.

It does at least down to 7.x.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de

_______________________________________________

[Gary Jennejohn]

On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 08:45:17 +0700
Victor Sudakov <sud...@sibptus.tomsk.ru> wrote:

> Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> >
> > > csup already has a CVS mode, at least in 9-current. I don't use older
> > > versions of FreeBSD so I don't know whether it supports CVS there.
> >
> > It does at least down to 7.x.
>

> High time to fix this botheration, isn't it?
>

This has been discussed in some mailing list (don't remember which) before.

IIRC the problem is caused by the mechanism used to check commits from svn
into CVS. I doubt it's easy to fix and IMO not worth the bother.

--
Gary Jennejohn

[Victor Sudakov]

Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> > >
> > > > csup already has a CVS mode, at least in 9-current. I don't use older
> > > > versions of FreeBSD so I don't know whether it supports CVS there.
> > >
> > > It does at least down to 7.x.
> >
> > High time to fix this botheration, isn't it?
> >
>
> This has been discussed in some mailing list (don't remember which) before.
>
> IIRC the problem is caused by the mechanism used to check commits from svn
> into CVS.

simon@ holds a different view:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hubs/2009-August/002083.html

> I doubt it's easy to fix and IMO not worth the bother.

--

Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
sip:sud...@sibptus.tomsk.ru