Re: bk error (OT)

Previous message: Chris Wright: "Re: bk error (OT)"
In reply to: Chris Wright: "Re: bk error (OT)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

robbat_private

On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Chris Wright wrote:

> * Robb Romans (robbat_private) wrote:
> > Anyone have a clue what this means:
>
> Looks like the patch it pulled was corrupted or not properly written to
> local disk (in PENDING/).  Does the error persist?  Perhaps upgrading your
> BK binaries.  It worked for me on three machines (using two different
> versions of BK).
>
> $ bk version
> BitKeeper/Free version is bk-2.0.4 20011108052134 for x86-glibc22-linux
> Built by: rootat_private
> Built on: Tue Nov 27 23:32:26 PST 2001
>
> and
>
> $ bk version
> BitKeeper/Free version is bk-2.1.6-pre5 20020330075529 for
> x86-glibc22-linux
> Built by: lmat_private in /build/bk-2.1.x-lm/src
> Built on: Sat Mar 30 00:14:45 PST 2002
>
> cheers,
> -chris

Hrm. The error occurred on two different machines, with two different bk
trees. It is working now, with no changes other than time. How odd.

$ bk version
BitKeeper/Free version is bk-2.1.6-pre5 20020330075529 for
x86-glibc22-linux
Built by: lmat_private in /build/bk-2.1.x-lm/src
Built on: Sat Mar 30 00:14:45 PST 2002

	Prost!
	Robb

-- 
Robb Romans                     (512) 838-0419
Linux Commando                  T/L   678-0419
IBM Linux Technology Center     KD5SQF

Ask me about the W5IBM Amateur Radio Club

_______________________________________________
linux-security-module mailing list
linux-security-moduleat_private
http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module