Paolo Carlini wrote:
> On 01/15/2010 05:05 PM, Adam Butcher wrote:
>>>> If you're on a posix-compatible have you tried using SIGQUIT (CTRL-\
>>>> or CTRL-4) instead of SIGINT?
>>>>
>>> Or kill -9 of course, but beware; Vincent LeFevre reported sandboxes
>>> corrupted beyond anything 'svn cleanup' could repair in one of the
>>> links I posted in another reply.
>> Sure, this is a last resort. I only mentioned SIGQUIT because its
>> 'typeable' so you wouldn't have the annoyance of going to a new shell (or
>> suspending svn), finding the pid and killing it (or use killall). That's
>> providing svn doesn't implement the same best-effort cancellation
>> checkpoints for SIGQUIT also of course.
>>
> Thanks to everybody who replied. At least now I know that the issue is
> known and it *is* an issue ;)
>
> By the way, I find a bit funny the cautionary remarks about kill -9, etc:
> what else one can do when it gets unrecoverably stuck? Just kill it and
> hope for the best, I say.
A lot of the time it's not really stuck, just taking a looooo-o-ong slow
time to do a big job, that's all. In those cases, leaving it run while you go
for a coffee might still end up quicker than killing it and having to checkout
a new sandbox. If it's really genuinely stuck, then yeah, of course: what you
say.
cheers,
DaveK
[ I'm ready to drop this thread now, think I've strayed far enough OT for one
afternoon :) ]
