Philippe Andersson wrote on Tue, May 28, 2013 at 09:52:10 +0200:
> Hello list,
>
> We're starting to create slave Subversion repos for installation on
> remote sites. All of them will svnsync against a single central master
> at headquarters.
>
> Now the question: we would like all users on the r
Hi everyone,
I'd like to point readers following Subversion development to the Hackathon
announcement on our website: http://subversion.apache.org/#news-20130628
Hackathons provide an opportunity for the Subversion development community
to meet in person and work together in the same location. Th
On 28.05.2013 15:15, Philip Martin wrote:
Are you running some non-standard kernel?
Depends on your definition of 'standard'. ;-)
I'm using the default kernel linux-image-2.6.32-46-generic from the
Ubuntu Lucid repositories.
Tobias Bading writes:
> Did you run the tests on Ubuntu 10.04 on an ext3 or ext4 filesystem?
> On ext3 you might not encounter this problem because ext3 only has a
> timestamp resolution of a second, thus you don't enter the
> "if(finfo.mtime % APR_USEC_PER_SEC)" block in
> svn_io_sleep_for_times
Branko Čibej writes:
> What we /should/ do is create a tempfile and keep changing and stat'ing
> it until its mtime changes. We could do this with an exponential backoff
> sleep, too. Then there would be no guesswork about the timestamp
> resolution of the WC file system.
>
> The problem is that
On 28.05.2013 14:31, Philip Martin wrote:
Tobias Bading writes:
b) '{ while true; do echo "">t; ls -l --full-time t; rm t; done; } |
uniq' prints exactly *two* lines per second, one every 0.5 seconds,
exact down to the millisecond.
I have an Ubuntu 12.04 machine and I see the expected behaviou
On 28.05.2013 12:54, Philip Martin wrote:
> Tobias Bading writes:
>
>> On 27.05.2013 16:12, Tobias Bading wrote:
>>> On 27.05.2013 16:01, Branko Čibej wrote:
Can you try this: run the following command for a couple of seconds, it
should give you an idea about the system clock precision.
Tobias Bading writes:
> b) '{ while true; do echo "" >t; ls -l --full-time t; rm t; done; } |
> uniq' prints exactly *two* lines per second, one every 0.5 seconds,
> exact down to the millisecond.
I have an Ubuntu 12.04 machine and I see the expected behaviour: lots of
different timestamps. I h
From: kapila narang [mailto:kapilanar...@gmail.com]
Sent: 28 May 2013 12:08
To: users@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Get subversion python bindings on existing subversion setup
Hi,
I have subversion 1.6.11 installed on redhat 64bit server used since long.
See
Hi,
I have subversion 1.6.11 installed on redhat 64bit server used since
long. Seems to be installed using rpm/yum not from source.
Can you suggest me how i get svn python binding for existing setup without
effective my current environment? everyone says of compiling from source,
which i am not
On 28.05.2013 12:54, Philip Martin wrote:
Tobias Bading writes:
On 27.05.2013 16:12, Tobias Bading wrote:
On 27.05.2013 16:01, Branko Čibej wrote:
Can you try this: run the following command for a couple of seconds, it
should give you an idea about the system clock precision.
{ while true; d
Tobias Bading writes:
> On 27.05.2013 16:12, Tobias Bading wrote:
>> On 27.05.2013 16:01, Branko Čibej wrote:
>>> Can you try this: run the following command for a couple of seconds, it
>>> should give you an idea about the system clock precision.
>>>
>>> { while true; do date '+%M:%S.%N'; done;
Hello list,
We're starting to create slave Subversion repos for installation on
remote sites. All of them will svnsync against a single central master
at headquarters.
Now the question: we would like all users on the remote sites to
authenticate against the master (to avoid having replicating tha
On 27.05.2013 16:12, Tobias Bading wrote:
On 27.05.2013 16:01, Branko Čibej wrote:
Can you try this: run the following command for a couple of seconds, it
should give you an idea about the system clock precision.
{ while true; do date '+%M:%S.%N'; done; } | uniq
Redirected to a file, I get ab
14 matches
Mail list logo
