[PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Andy Parkins]

If a repository was checked out via git-cvsserver and then later a new
file is added to the git repository via some other method; a CVS update
wasn't fetching the new file.

It would be reported as a new file as
 A some/dir/newfile.c
but would never appear in the directory.

The problem (I think) is that when git-cvsserver detected a new file, it
was issuing the new file message then skipping the actual file send part
and moving to the next file its list.  In fact only an updated file
would be transmitted.

The fix is to make the added file section identical to the udpated file
section.  This additionally makes git-cvsserver behave like a
traditional CVS server and will now output
 U some/dir/newfile.c
for an added file.

Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
---
This is in response to Simon Schubert's suggestion that T_ADDED is an
inappropriate category for a remotely added file.  Instead this treats
remotely added files the same as remotely changed files.

 git-cvsserver.perl |   10 +++++-----
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/git-cvsserver.perl b/git-cvsserver.perl
index a33a876..501c182 100755
--- a/git-cvsserver.perl
+++ b/git-cvsserver.perl
@@ -879,11 +879,11 @@ sub req_update
 	    elsif ( !defined($wrev) || $wrev == 0 )
 	    {
 	        $log->info("Tell the client the file will be added");
-		print "MT text A \n";
-                print "MT fname $filename\n";
-                print "MT newline\n";
-		next;
-
+			print "MT +updated\n";
+			print "MT text U \n";
+			print "MT fname $filename\n";
+			print "MT newline\n";
+			print "MT -updated\n";
 	    }
 	    else {
                 $log->info("Updating '$filename' $wrev");
-- 
1.5.0.rc1.gf4b6c

Re: [PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Junio C Hamano]

Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com> writes:

> If a repository was checked out via git-cvsserver and then later a new
> file is added to the git repository via some other method; a CVS update
> wasn't fetching the new file.
>
> It would be reported as a new file as
>  A some/dir/newfile.c
> but would never appear in the directory.
>
> The problem (I think) is that when git-cvsserver detected a new file, it
> was issuing the new file message then skipping the actual file send part
> and moving to the next file its list.  In fact only an updated file
> would be transmitted.
>
> The fix is to make the added file section identical to the udpated file
> section.  This additionally makes git-cvsserver behave like a
> traditional CVS server and will now output
>  U some/dir/newfile.c
> for an added file.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
> ---
> This is in response to Simon Schubert's suggestion that T_ADDED is an
> inappropriate category for a remotely added file.  Instead this treats
> remotely added files the same as remotely changed files.

Martin, I think this looks like a sane change.  

I do not have anything other than the real CVS running on a
Linux box to try this change (most notably I do not do Eclipse
nor Tortoise) myself and I am reluctant to touch things I cannot
personally test at this stage near the release.  I am sure Andy
tested this for his own use in his environment, but I would
really appreciate a third party Ack from an environment
different from the originator of the patch.

>  git-cvsserver.perl |   10 +++++-----
>  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/git-cvsserver.perl b/git-cvsserver.perl
> index a33a876..501c182 100755
> --- a/git-cvsserver.perl
> +++ b/git-cvsserver.perl
> @@ -879,11 +879,11 @@ sub req_update
>  	    elsif ( !defined($wrev) || $wrev == 0 )
>  	    {
>  	        $log->info("Tell the client the file will be added");
> -		print "MT text A \n";
> -                print "MT fname $filename\n";
> -                print "MT newline\n";
> -		next;
> -
> +			print "MT +updated\n";
> +			print "MT text U \n";
> +			print "MT fname $filename\n";
> +			print "MT newline\n";
> +			print "MT -updated\n";
>  	    }
>  	    else {
>                  $log->info("Updating '$filename' $wrev");
> -- 
> 1.5.0.rc1.gf4b6c

Re: [PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Martin Langhoff]

On 1/22/07, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:

> > This is in response to Simon Schubert's suggestion that T_ADDED is an
> > inappropriate category for a remotely added file.  Instead this treats
> > remotely added files the same as remotely changed files.
>
> Martin, I think this looks like a sane change.

It does -- sorry I've been offline for a few days and catching up with work.

> I do not have anything other than the real CVS running on a
> Linux box to try this change (most notably I do not do Eclipse
> nor Tortoise) myself and I am reluctant to touch things I cannot
> personally test at this stage near the release.

Fair enough. I'll give it whirl later tonight. For a quick test, you can always

export CVS_SERVER=/home/martin/src/git/git-cvsserver.perl
cvs update

> tested this for his own use in his environment, but I would
> really appreciate a third party Ack from an environment
> different from the originator of the patch.

Yup. Will test later tonight.


martin

Re: [PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Junio C Hamano]

"Martin Langhoff" <martin.langhoff@gmail.com> writes:

>> I do not have anything other than the real CVS running on a
>> Linux box to try this change (most notably I do not do Eclipse
>> nor Tortoise) myself and I am reluctant to touch things I cannot
>> personally test at this stage near the release.
>
> Fair enough. I'll give it whirl later tonight. For a quick test, you can always
>
> export CVS_SERVER=/home/martin/src/git/git-cvsserver.perl
> cvs update

Yes, that's what I did (what I meant was I can test with cvs as
client but not other clients that talk CVS remote protocols).

>> tested this for his own use in his environment, but I would
>> really appreciate a third party Ack from an environment
>> different from the originator of the patch.
>
> Yup. Will test later tonight.

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Andy Parkins]

On Sunday 2007 January 21 14:25, Andy Parkins wrote:

> This is in response to Simon Schubert's suggestion that T_ADDED is an
> inappropriate category for a remotely added file.  Instead this treats
> remotely added files the same as remotely changed files.

I'm still concerned that this fix is not right.  Having thought more about it, 
I suspect that this breaks the other "added-file" case, where the file is 
added locally but not remotely.

There are three key cases:
 1. File present locally and remotely.  Modified remotely.  Response "U"
 2. File present locally only.  Response should be "A"
 3. File present remotely only.  Response should be "U"

I think the real problem is that both 2 and 3 are being handled in the same 
place.  Hence, my patch, which has fixed case 3; will have broken case 2.

I need a bit of confirmation from Martin; but I suspect that the correct fix 
is something like this:

    elsif ( (!defined($wrev) || $wrev == 0) && !defined($meta->{revision})
    {
        $log->info("Tell the client the file will be added");

If I'm correct, this would only run the added section when there is no 
matching revision in the repository - this would be case 2.  Then case 3 
would be handled as the else to this if, which handles every other case.

My testing of this works, but I'd like confirmation that I'm right in this 
thinking?  Patch to follow...


Andy
-- 
Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIEE
andyparkins@gmail.com

[PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Andy Parkins]

If a repository was checked out via git-cvsserver and then later a new
file is added to the git repository via some other method; a CVS update
wasn't fetching the new file.

It would be reported as a new file as
 A some/dir/newfile.c
but would never appear in the directory.

The problem seems to be that git-cvsserver was treating these two cases
identically, as "A" type results.

1. New file in repository
2. New file locally

In fact, traditionally, case 1 is treated as a "U" result, and case 2
only is treated as an "A" result.  "A", should just report that the file
is added locally and then skip that file during an update as their is
(of course) nothing to send.

In both these cases there is no working revision, so the checking for
"is there no working revision" will return true.  The test for case 2
needs refining to say "if there is no working revision and no upstream
revision".  This patch does just that, leaving case 1 to be handled by
the normal "U" handler.

I've also updated the log message to more accurately describe the
operation.  i.e. that "A" means that content is scheduled for addition;
not that it actually has been added.

Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
---
 git-cvsserver.perl |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/git-cvsserver.perl b/git-cvsserver.perl
index a33a876..2479f71 100755
--- a/git-cvsserver.perl
+++ b/git-cvsserver.perl
@@ -876,9 +876,9 @@ sub req_update
                 print "MT newline\n";
 		next;
 	    }
-	    elsif ( !defined($wrev) || $wrev == 0 )
+	    elsif ( (!defined($wrev) || $wrev == 0) && (!defined($meta->{revision}) || $meta->{revision} == 0) )
 	    {
-	        $log->info("Tell the client the file will be added");
+	        $log->info("Tell the client the file is scheduled for addition");
 		print "MT text A \n";
                 print "MT fname $filename\n";
                 print "MT newline\n";
-- 
1.5.0.rc2.g3f8f2

[PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Andy Parkins]

If a repository was checked out via git-cvsserver and then later a new
file is added to the git repository via some other method; a CVS update
wasn't fetching the new file.

It would be reported as a new file as
 A some/dir/newfile.c
but would never appear in the directory.

The problem seems to be that git-cvsserver was treating these two cases
identically, as "A" type results.

1. New file in repository
2. New file locally

In fact, traditionally, case 1 is treated as a "U" result, and case 2
only is treated as an "A" result.  "A", should just report that the file
is added locally and then skip that file during an update as there is
(of course) nothing to send.

In both these cases there is no working revision, so the checking for
"is there no working revision" will return true.  The test for case 2
needs refining to say "if there is no working revision and no upstream
revision".  This patch does just that, leaving case 1 to be handled by
the normal "U" handler.

I've also updated the log message to more accurately describe the
operation.  i.e. that "A" means that content is scheduled for addition;
not that it actually has been added.

Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
---

Apologies; this one is the real replacement.  The previous patch didn't
include the correction to the update log message which would potentially
use an undefined variable when adding new content.

 git-cvsserver.perl |    6 +++---
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/git-cvsserver.perl b/git-cvsserver.perl
index a33a876..e18e901 100755
--- a/git-cvsserver.perl
+++ b/git-cvsserver.perl
@@ -876,9 +876,9 @@ sub req_update
                 print "MT newline\n";
 		next;
 	    }
-	    elsif ( !defined($wrev) || $wrev == 0 )
+	    elsif ( (!defined($wrev) || $wrev == 0) && (!defined($meta->{revision}) || $meta->{revision} == 0) )
 	    {
-	        $log->info("Tell the client the file will be added");
+	        $log->info("Tell the client the file is scheduled for addition");
 		print "MT text A \n";
                 print "MT fname $filename\n";
                 print "MT newline\n";
@@ -886,7 +886,7 @@ sub req_update
 
 	    }
 	    else {
-                $log->info("Updating '$filename' $wrev");
+                $log->info("Updating '$filename' to ".$meta->{revision});
                 print "MT +updated\n";
                 print "MT text U \n";
                 print "MT fname $filename\n";
-- 
1.5.0.rc2.g3f8f2

Re: [PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Simon 'corecode' Schubert]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1039 bytes --]

Andy Parkins wrote:
> @@ -876,9 +876,9 @@ sub req_update
>                  print "MT newline\n";
>  		next;
>  	    }
> -	    elsif ( !defined($wrev) || $wrev == 0 )
> +	    elsif ( (!defined($wrev) || $wrev == 0) && (!defined($meta->{revision}) || $meta->{revision} == 0) )
>  	    {
> -	        $log->info("Tell the client the file will be added");
> +	        $log->info("Tell the client the file is scheduled for addition");

This is nice but probably does not handle a collision (cvs output: file was added by a third party) well and will probably overwrite the locally added file.  however it is a step in the right direction.  from skimming the code I couldn't find collision handling anyways.

cheers
  simon

-- 
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low €€€ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

[PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Andy Parkins]

If a repository was checked out via git-cvsserver and then later a new
file is added to the git repository via some other method; a CVS update
wasn't fetching the new file.

It would be reported as a new file as
 A some/dir/newfile.c
but would never appear in the directory.

The problem (I think) is that when git-cvsserver detected a new file, it
was issuing the new file message then skipping the actual file send part
and moving to the next file its list.  In fact only an updated file
would be transmitted.

The fix is to simply remove the "next" that was skipping the file
transmit; which is what this patch does.

Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
---
I don't understand enough about the CVS protocol to know whether this really
is the right fix.  It certainly addresses my problem, but I assume that the "next"
was put in there for a reason.

 git-cvsserver.perl |    1 -
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/git-cvsserver.perl b/git-cvsserver.perl
index a33a876..c370a53 100755
--- a/git-cvsserver.perl
+++ b/git-cvsserver.perl
@@ -882,7 +882,6 @@ sub req_update
 		print "MT text A \n";
                 print "MT fname $filename\n";
                 print "MT newline\n";
-		next;
 
 	    }
 	    else {
-- 
1.5.0.rc1.gf4b6c

Re: [PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Simon 'corecode' Schubert]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 852 bytes --]

Andy Parkins wrote:
> diff --git a/git-cvsserver.perl b/git-cvsserver.perl
> index a33a876..c370a53 100755
> --- a/git-cvsserver.perl
> +++ b/git-cvsserver.perl
> @@ -882,7 +882,6 @@ sub req_update
>  		print "MT text A \n";
>                  print "MT fname $filename\n";
>                  print "MT newline\n";
> -		next;

I think this is the wrong fix.  Reading cvs's classify.c, T_ADDED is only generated for *locally* added files, never for added files in the repo.  The correct status would be "U" as well.

cheers
  simon

-- 
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low €€€ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Andy Parkins]

On Saturday 2007, January 20 01:19, Simon 'corecode' Schubert wrote:

> I think this is the wrong fix.  Reading cvs's classify.c, T_ADDED is
> only generated for *locally* added files, never for added files in
> the repo.  The correct status would be "U" as well.

I'm sure you're right; I don't know enough about CVS to comment.  The 
real fix would seem to be to completely remove the special case for 
added files and let it drop through to the normal update code. 

However, I'm not confident about that either.



Andy

-- 
Dr Andrew Parkins, M Eng (Hons), AMIEE
andyparkins@gmail.com

Re: [PATCH] New files in git weren't being downloaded during CVS update

[Simon 'corecode' Schubert]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 867 bytes --]

Andy Parkins wrote:
> On Saturday 2007, January 20 01:19, Simon 'corecode' Schubert wrote:
> 
>> I think this is the wrong fix.  Reading cvs's classify.c, T_ADDED is
>> only generated for *locally* added files, never for added files in
>> the repo.  The correct status would be "U" as well.
> 
> I'm sure you're right; I don't know enough about CVS to comment.  The 
> real fix would seem to be to completely remove the special case for 
> added files and let it drop through to the normal update code. 

yes, that's what I ment.

cheers
  simon

-- 
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low €€€ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]