Daniel Shahaf <danie...@elego.de> writes:
> Philip Martin wrote on Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:09:54 +0100:
>> Daniel Shahaf <danie...@elego.de> writes:
>>
>> > Philip Martin wrote on Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 10:49:36 +0100:
>> >>
>> >> I attached to the issue a repository that demonstrates the corruption;
>> >> verify doesn't report a problem on that repository. What does verify
>> >> check?
>> >
>> > validate_root_noderev() catches an instance of the #4129 corruption and
>> > in its docstring xrefs svn_fs_fs__verify(), so I think the checks in the
>> > former are done in the latter too.
>>
>> validate_root_noderev is only called by write_final_rev and not during
>> verify. svn_fs_fs__verify calls svn_fs_fs__verify_root and that does:
>>
>> /* Issue #4129: bogus predecessors. */
>> /* Check 1: predecessor must be an earlier revision.
>> */
>> if (pred_rev >= root->rev)
>> return svn_error_createf(SVN_ERR_FS_CORRUPT, NULL,
>> "r%ld's root node's predecessor is r%ld"
>> " but must be earlier revision",
>> root->rev, pred_rev);
>
> The check was included in svn_fs_fs__verify_root() in r1349313:
>
> /* Verify explicitly the predecessor of the root. */
> {
> ...
> /* Check the predecessor's revision. */
> if (pred_id)
> {
> SVN_ERR(svn_fs_fs__dag_get_node(&pred, root->fs, pred_id, pool));
> SVN_ERR(svn_fs_fs__dag_get_revision(&pred_rev, pred, pool));
> if (pred_rev+1 != root->rev)
> /* Issue #4129. */
> return svn_error_createf(SVN_ERR_FS_CORRUPT, NULL,
> "r%ld's root node's predecessor is r%ld",
> root->rev, pred_rev);
> }
> {
That check was relaxed by:
r1358322 | stefan2 | 2012-07-06 19:04:09 +0100 (Fri, 06 Jul 2012) | 5 lines
Relax overly strict consistency check that is not covered by the FSFS
format specification.
* subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/tree.c
(svn_fs_fs__verify_root): fix test and add commentary
--
Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
