Garance A Drosihn
drosih at rpi.edu
Tue Nov 29 19:53:38 GMT 2005
At 2:45 PM +0100 11/29/05, Mischa Peters wrote:
>> ...but with that said, I should also note that I upgraded to the
>> subversion 1.3.0-rc2 port (I happened to do it the very evening
>> before Mischa Peters sent the first warning message!). I have
>> not seen any problems. The projects I use it for are admittedly
>> small, so that probably doesn't mean much. On the other hand, I
>> also don't see many reports of other people having trouble with
>> this release-candidate version.
>Are you running svnserve?
I am not running synserv.
All my subversion repositories are using fsfs, not bdb.
In a later message, Mischa Peters wrote:
>I am not using FSFS.
>What is the BDB upgrade procedure?
Any time a new version of BDB is installed, you need to 'svn dump'
your repository (*before* you upgrade BDB), then update the BDB
port, and then rebuild your repository from the earlier dump.
Well, you don't really need to do it *every* time you upgrade
BDB, but unfortunately BDB (as a program) has an extremely poor
record at remaining compatible with itself. That, in fact, is
exactly why I avoid using BDB for any of my repositories. Note
that subversion started out supporting *only* BDB as the backend
database, but so many people had problems with this that the
subversion project later added the 'fsfs' option. At this point,
I think the subversion project has even changed the default from
BDB to fsfs.
While I no longer use BDB for anything, I still follow it via
the ports mechanism (only because subversion used to need it).
On my system, it looks like both subversion and apr depend on
'db42', and it also looks like I had to rebuild the 'db42' port
on Nov 19th. I must admit I don't know why I did that, but I
assume it was for a new version of BDB. You might want to check
to see which version of BDB is being used by subversion and apr
on your system (apr is used by subversion...), and see if you
recently upgraded the version of BDB that subversion uses.
>But I feel that someone made a real error in judgement on this,
>1.3.0-rc2 should have never be allowed to replace the stable
>port of Subversion.
>And it would make sense to revert back to 1.2.3.
The thing is, your problem may have nothing to do with the new
port for subversion. Based on what you've told us, it could be
many other things which are causing you problems.
To me, it seems that if there is a problem with 1.3.0-rc2, then
there should be more people reporting errors with it. Many
people upgrade their ports without looking at this mailing list,
and then join the mailing list only when they've been burned by
some port. I don't see that happening in this case.
Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad at gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer or gad at freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih at rpi.edu
More information about the freebsd-ports