Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*CVS\s+server\s+broken\s*$/: 18 ]

Total 18 documents matching your query.

1. CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: "Andi Kleen" <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 01:52:12 +0200
Looks like the anonymous CVS server is broken: linux-2.4-xfs > cvs -z3 update -d . cvs [update aborted]: unrecognized auth response from oss.sgi.com: chroot: error in loading shared libraries: libnsl
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00131.html (7,278 bytes)

2. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 08:55:29 -0500
We have been battling a bug in syslog that caused the system to lock up in strange ways. I don't know if this problem is related to that or not, but cvs does seem to be working again. -- Russell Catt
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00132.html (8,145 bytes)

3. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: "Andi Kleen" <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 16:05:37 +0200
Yes, thanks it works now again. -Andi
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00133.html (8,546 bytes)

4. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: "Andi Kleen" <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 02:48:53 +0200
Although the update works, it seems to be very inconsistent now. Various updates seem to be only partly merged (e.g. the last xfs_ioctl.c change) and it doesn't compile at all. CVS also complains all
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00136.html (8,929 bytes)

5. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: "Nathan Scott" <nathans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 11:03:45 -0500
Sounds like something is very broken indeed. Both of xfs_thread.c & timespec.h are supposed to have gone away ... there is certainly nothing including timespec.h in the ptools tree. I wouldn't use t
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00137.html (9,029 bytes)

6. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 01:14:47 -0500
I assume this is the 2.4 tree? I'll have to re gen the tree again. Under the current method of generating the CVS tree from the p_tools tree deletions in the p_tools tree don't happen in the CVS tree
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00140.html (9,773 bytes)

7. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: "Andi Kleen" <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 18:46:06 +0200
Looks still broken: cvs server: cannot open directory /cvs/linux-2.4-xfs/linux/scripts/usb: No such file or directory cvs server: skipping directory linux/scripts/usb ak@bert:~/lsrc/sgi/linux-2.4-xfs
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00143.html (10,743 bytes)

8. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 12:34:31 -0500
ch file or directory nk Something really odd is going on in the process of exporting things to the cvs tree - I presume you mean linvfs_follow_link(), it used to use lookup_dentry, it now looks like
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00144.html (9,547 bytes)

9. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 12:44:50 -0500
Hmm, I just did a clean checkout of the tree - looks the same as the internal version of XFS to me. Of course, this was a clean checkout, not an update into a previously populated tree. Steve
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00145.html (7,923 bytes)

10. CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: "Andi Kleen" <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 01:52:12 +0200
Looks like the anonymous CVS server is broken: linux-2.4-xfs > cvs -z3 update -d . cvs [update aborted]: unrecognized auth response from oss.sgi.com: chroot: error in loading shared libraries: libnsl
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00354.html (7,278 bytes)

11. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 08:55:29 -0500
We have been battling a bug in syslog that caused the system to lock up in strange ways. I don't know if this problem is related to that or not, but cvs does seem to be working again. -- Russell Catt
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00355.html (8,145 bytes)

12. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: "Andi Kleen" <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 16:05:37 +0200
Yes, thanks it works now again. -Andi
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00356.html (8,546 bytes)

13. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: "Andi Kleen" <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 02:48:53 +0200
Although the update works, it seems to be very inconsistent now. Various updates seem to be only partly merged (e.g. the last xfs_ioctl.c change) and it doesn't compile at all. CVS also complains all
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00359.html (8,929 bytes)

14. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: "Nathan Scott" <nathans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 11:03:45 -0500
Sounds like something is very broken indeed. Both of xfs_thread.c & timespec.h are supposed to have gone away ... there is certainly nothing including timespec.h in the ptools tree. I wouldn't use t
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00360.html (9,029 bytes)

15. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 01:14:47 -0500
I assume this is the 2.4 tree? I'll have to re gen the tree again. Under the current method of generating the CVS tree from the p_tools tree deletions in the p_tools tree don't happen in the CVS tree
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00363.html (9,773 bytes)

16. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: "Andi Kleen" <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 18:46:06 +0200
Looks still broken: cvs server: cannot open directory /cvs/linux-2.4-xfs/linux/scripts/usb: No such file or directory cvs server: skipping directory linux/scripts/usb ak@bert:~/lsrc/sgi/linux-2.4-xfs
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00366.html (10,743 bytes)

17. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 12:34:31 -0500
ch file or directory nk Something really odd is going on in the process of exporting things to the cvs tree - I presume you mean linvfs_follow_link(), it used to use lookup_dentry, it now looks like
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00367.html (9,547 bytes)

18. Re: CVS server broken (score: 1)
Author: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 12:44:50 -0500
Hmm, I just did a clean checkout of the tree - looks the same as the internal version of XFS to me. Of course, this was a clean checkout, not an update into a previously populated tree. Steve
/archives/xfs/2000-06/msg00368.html (7,923 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu