This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: checking in >= 256k file fatally corrupts rcs file
- From: Warren Young <warren at etr-usa dot com>
- To: Cygwin-L <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 07:37:26 -0600
- Subject: Re: checking in >= 256k file fatally corrupts rcs file
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20131008102204 dot GB9241 at plunk dot org> <525499E5 dot 4090608 at etr-usa dot com> <20131009003055 dot GA30082 at plunk dot org> <5254B1C0 dot 9020004 at etr-usa dot com> <20131009070534 dot GA8855 at plunk dot org>
On 10/9/2013 01:05, Don Hatch wrote:
if I forget to set the variable, or set it wrong,
or someone else doesn't know about the variable and runs into the bug,
then corruption happens and work is irretrievably lost.
How is this more difficult than what you're already doing, manually
rolling back to the previous version?
We're talking about a one-time one-line change to your .bash_profile:
export RCS_MEM_LIMIT=10240
That will let you have 10 MiB diffs.
I tried it, and it does indeed allow your RUNME script to finish
successfully.
(I lost a significant amount when I hit the bug).
I assume you're talking about the record of changes between your last
backup and the current version. The last backup should be pretty
recent, so your current version shouldn't be too far different from it.
Would it be possible to simply declare 5.8 DOA
The Cygwin package system allows one to mark 5.8-1 as obsolete, but I
don't know if it can be told "and downgrade to 5.7-11".
If not, can we make a 5.9 that's identical to 5.7,
If a new Cygwin package had to come out based on 5.7, it would be called
5.7-12, not 5.9. GNU rcs 5.9 already exists. (The current upstream
release is 5.9.1.) Cygwin packages generally leave the upstream
revision numbers unmolested.
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple