Thread: Re: [PATCHES] Include file in regress.c
"Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net> writes:
> This patch adds a required include file to regress.c, required to get at
> InvalidTransactionId.
If that's needed, why isn't everybody else's build falling over too?
regards, tom lane
> > This patch adds a required include file to regress.c, > required to get > > at InvalidTransactionId. > > If that's needed, why isn't everybody else's build falling over too? Uh, because it's already included 4 lines up?! I must've been tired when I wrote that patch. Must've been something wrong in my cvs pull, because I cleaned out the directory and did a new cvs update, and now it works without it. Sorry about the fuss. (I seem to have something funky in my cvs repo in general - doing a cvs diff gives me a *huge* diff for files like gram.c that I thought weren't supposed to be in cvs at all. Any ideas on why that would be? (I'm rsync:ing to a local repository and then running against that one)) //Magnus
"Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net> writes:
> (I seem to have something funky in my cvs repo in general - doing a cvs
> diff gives me a *huge* diff for files like gram.c that I thought weren't
> supposed to be in cvs at all. Any ideas on why that would be? (I'm
> rsync:ing to a local repository and then running against that one))
Hm, gram.c once was in CVS, years ago ... but I don't know why you'd be
seeing anything about it now.
regards, tom lane
> > (I seem to have something funky in my cvs repo in general - doing a > > cvs diff gives me a *huge* diff for files like gram.c that > I thought > > weren't supposed to be in cvs at all. Any ideas on why that > would be? > > (I'm rsync:ing to a local repository and then running against that > > one)) > > Hm, gram.c once was in CVS, years ago ... but I don't know > why you'd be seeing anything about it now. That's kinda what baffles me as well... if I look into my cvs repository directory, it shows only gram.y,v, with gram.c,v in Attic - which seems to make sense. Must be my client that's gone crazy. In fact, mmy output ends up as: Index: src\backend\parser/gram.c =================================================================== RCS file: c:/prog/cvsrepo/pgsql/pgsql/src/backend/parser/Attic/gram.c,v retrieving revision 2.90 diff -c -r2.90 gram.c *** src\backend\parser/gram.c 7 May 1999 01:22:54 -0000 2.90 --- src\backend\parser/gram.c 14 Sep 2006 06:10:08 -0000 So I guess the question is down to why the hell it's looking at the attic file at all. When I run cvs update on it, I get things like: cvs.exe update: Updating src\backend\parser M src\backend\parser/gram.c cvs.exe update: use `cvs.exe add' to create an entry for src\backend\parser/scan.c which is kinda weird, because gram.c is in .cvsignore. //Magnus
Magnus Hagander wrote: > if I look into my cvs repository directory, it shows only gram.y,v, with > gram.c,v in Attic - which seems to make sense. Must be my client that's > gone crazy. In fact, mmy output ends up as: > > Index: src\backend\parser/gram.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: c:/prog/cvsrepo/pgsql/pgsql/src/backend/parser/Attic/gram.c,v > retrieving revision 2.90 > diff -c -r2.90 gram.c > *** src\backend\parser/gram.c 7 May 1999 01:22:54 -0000 2.90 > --- src\backend\parser/gram.c 14 Sep 2006 06:10:08 -0000 > > > So I guess the question is down to why the hell it's looking at the > attic file at all. When I run cvs update on it, I get things like: Hmm, maybe you did a "cvs add" for that file at some point? What does your CVS/Entries file look for that dir? -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
> > if I look into my cvs repository directory, it shows only > gram.y,v, > > with gram.c,v in Attic - which seems to make sense. Must be my > client > > that's gone crazy. In fact, mmy output ends up as: > > > > Index: src\backend\parser/gram.c > > > =================================================================== > > RCS file: > > c:/prog/cvsrepo/pgsql/pgsql/src/backend/parser/Attic/gram.c,v > > retrieving revision 2.90 > > diff -c -r2.90 gram.c > > *** src\backend\parser/gram.c 7 May 1999 01:22:54 -0000 > 2.90 > > --- src\backend\parser/gram.c 14 Sep 2006 06:10:08 -0000 > > > > > > So I guess the question is down to why the hell it's looking at > the > > attic file at all. When I run cvs update on it, I get things > like: > > Hmm, maybe you did a "cvs add" for that file at some point? I very much doubt that. Especially since it asks me to do that whenever I 'cvs diff'. > What does your CVS/Entries file look for that dir? It does contain both gram.c and gram.y. They look just the same (except for version and date, of course). I don't know how it got there ;-) Is it safe to just remove that? //Magnus
Magnus Hagander wrote: > > What does your CVS/Entries file look for that dir? > > It does contain both gram.c and gram.y. They look just the same (except > for version and date, of course). I don't know how it got there ;-) Is > it safe to just remove that? I don't know if it's safe, but my Entries file only contains gram.y, and I don't see any mention of gram.y anywhere else. Strangely, if I try to do a "cvs add gram.c", it fails with cvs add: `gram.c' added independently by second party I don't know what this means. (Why "second party" and not "third party"?). Even if I delete gram.c. Even if I remove it from .cvsignore. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > Strangely, if I try to do a "cvs add gram.c", it fails with > cvs add: `gram.c' added independently by second party > I don't know what this means. (Why "second party" and not "third > party"?). Even if I delete gram.c. Even if I remove it from > .cvsignore. I think "cvs add" probably contacts the server, because I seem to recall that it gives different output depending on whether the file already exists on another branch, and there's no way to tell that from your local working directory contents. The CVS history for gram.c looks a bit confused: http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/parser/Attic/gram.c How did revisions 2.89 and 2.90 come into existence when the file was already cvs-removed? This may be confusing the server too. regards, tom lane
> > Strangely, if I try to do a "cvs add gram.c", it fails with cvs > add: > > `gram.c' added independently by second party I don't know what > this > > means. (Why "second party" and not "third party"?). Even if I > delete > > gram.c. Even if I remove it from .cvsignore. > > I think "cvs add" probably contacts the server, because I seem to > recall that it gives different output depending on whether the file > already exists on another branch, and there's no way to tell that > from your local working directory contents. > > The CVS history for gram.c looks a bit confused: > http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/parser > /Attic/gram.c > How did revisions 2.89 and 2.90 come into existence when the file > was already cvs-removed? This may be confusing the server too. That definitely looks weird to me. Unfortunatly, it's way above me wrt CVS knowledge. I'm just going to have to live with it and remember to delete that part from my diffs... (It's not so hard, because it's several megabytes each time, and I don't normally produce patches that large..) //Magnus
"Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net> writes:
> That definitely looks weird to me. Unfortunatly, it's way above me wrt
> CVS knowledge. I'm just going to have to live with it and remember to
> delete that part from my diffs...
The weird thing is that it's not happening for other people. Have you
tried blowing away the whole tree and doing a fresh checkout? What CVS
version are you using?
regards, tom lane
> > That definitely looks weird to me. Unfortunatly, it's way > above me wrt > > CVS knowledge. I'm just going to have to live with it and > remember to > > delete that part from my diffs... > > The weird thing is that it's not happening for other people. > Have you tried blowing away the whole tree and doing a fresh > checkout? What CVS version are you using? Haven't tried that, but I will eventually (need to clean up some of the stuff I have in the tree first). I'm on: Concurrent Versions System (CVSNT) 2.5.02 (Servalan) Build 2064 (client/server) CVSNT version (Aug 19 2005) Copyright (c) 1999-2005 Tony Hoyle and others //Magnus