[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: centralized bzr (Re: Successful and unsuccessful Debian development tools)



Version: 0.9-1

* Brian May [Sun, 27 Aug 2006 17:43:24 +1000]:

>     Robert> Could you please run 'bzr upgrade' while using bzr
>     Robert> 0.9rc1. If my guess at your situation is right this will
>     Robert> take a while to run, but correct your performance issues.

>     >> Did I do something wrong?

>     >> bam@margay:~/bzr/diary-data$ bzr upgrade
>     >> /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/plugins/bzrtools/__init__.py:21:
>     >> DeprecationWarning: Modifying DEFAULT_IGNORE was deprecated in
>     >> version 0.9. Consider using
>     >> bzrlib.ignores.add_unique_user_ignores o r
>     >> bzrlib.ignores.add_runtime_ignores
>     >> /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/plugins/bzrtools/__init__.py:22:
>     >> DeprecationWarning: Modifying DEFAULT_IGNORE was deprecated in
>     >> version 0.9. Consider using
>     >> bzrlib.ignores.add_unique_user_ignores o r
>     >> bzrlib.ignores.add_runtime_ignores bzr: ERROR: The branch
>     >> format Bazaar-NG meta directory, format 1 is already at the
>     >> most recent format.

>     Adeodato> No. You just need to upgrade your bzrtool package to 0.9
>     Adeodato> as well.

> I had 0.9 installed already when doing this:

> ii  bzrtools            0.9.0-1             Collection of tools for bzr

Hm. I'd say that you have .pyc files left in:

  /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/plugins/bzrtools

Can you check, please? Also, do you remember having root bzr as root?

bzrtools > 0.9 does not put files under /usr/lib/python2.4, since it
uses python-support; and its maintainer scripts for < 0.9 did not
bytecompile the modules, so the most plausible explanation for .pyc
files in /usr/lib/python2.4 is having run bzr 0.8 as root.

To debian-python: this is presumably a bug in bzrtools?

> So what is going wrong?

>     >> Anyway, I tried the revert operation again with 0.9-2. Memory
>     >> usage was still high (205meg at one point), but bounded - much
>     >> better. The operation successfully completed this time.

>     Adeodato> Sounds acceptable to close ##380412, then?

> Yes, sounds good to me.

Done, thanks.

-- 
Adeodato Simó                                     dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer                                  adeodato at debian.org
 
                                    Listening to: Los Caramelos - Cherry



Reply to: