[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference smurf::buildhelp

Title:USG buildhelp questions/answers
Moderator:SMURF::FILTER
Created:Mon Apr 26 1993
Last Modified:Mon Jan 20 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2763
Total number of notes:5802

726.0. "Anyone seen this error before?" by SMURF::FILTER (Automatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puck) Mon May 09 1994 16:27

Date Of Receipt: 	 9-MAY-1994 14:39:31.54
From: 	ALPHA::denham "Jeff Denham USG  09-May-1994 1438"
To: 	odehelp@DEC:.zko.alpha
CC: 	
Subj: 	Anyone seen this error before?

Ode helpers,

I'm trying to check out a file against goldos.nightly. It fails as 
follows:

ode.gni> bco kern_aio.c

[ ./kernel/bsd/kern_aio.c ]
stat error: RCS file ./kernel/bsd/kern_aio.c,v is in use
stat error: RCS file ./kernel/bsd/kern_aio.c,v is in use
[ specified revision not found in the history revision ]

Any idea what's up? I checked out other files from kernel/bsd at the
same time this failed. When I do a blog on kern_aio.c, I get the same failure 
messages, then some legitimate-looking rev info, then this:

description:
----------------------------
revision 1.1
date: 1990/01/01 00:00:00;  author: devbld_gsf;  state: Exp;
branches:  1.1.1;  1.1.3;  1.1.4;  1.1.5;  1.1.7;  1.1.10;  1.1.12;  1.1.14;  1.
1.16;
*** Initial Trunk Revision ***
=============================================================================

This doesn't seem quite right. How can we get that file back? The same
exact behavior occurs when I back against goldos. Something must be
sick in the backing tree. Gack.

I do have a valid kerberos ticket.

Thanks for any insights,

Jeff

T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
726.1Re: Anyone seen this error before?SMURF::FILTERAutomatic Posting Software - mail to flume::puckMon May 09 1994 18:4068
Date Of Receipt: 	 9-MAY-1994 16:49:14.74
From: 	WASTED::jmf "Joshua M. Friedman OSF/UNIX SDE"
To: 	[email protected]
CC: 	odehelp@DEC:.zko.wasted
Subj: 	Re:  Anyone seen this error before?

Jeff, this (and one other) file were left in this intermediate locked
state on Thursday am when buffer crashed.  (rcs creates ,filename, files
as a locking mechanism, and removes them after the rcs operation; this
file's , file was blocking your operation.  I want to confirm that
the kern_aio.c,v file is ok before I unlock it, however, so I'll get
back to you after I get the previous night's backup version out for
comparison.

--josh

-------
From [email protected]  Mon May  9 14:39:55 1994
Delivery-Date: Mon, 09 May 94 14:39:58 -0400
Return-Path: [email protected]
Received: from alpha.zk3.dec.com by flambe.zk3.dec.com; (5.65/1.1.8.2/30Mar94-0502PM)
	id AA14525; Mon, 9 May 1994 14:39:55 -0400
Received: from localhost by alpha.zk3.dec.com; (5.65/1.1.8.2/05May94-1225PM)
	id AA03910; Mon, 9 May 1994 14:38:51 -0400
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Anyone seen this error before? 
Date: Mon, 09 May 94 14:38:50 -0400
From: "Jeff Denham, USG/Base OS, ZK3-3/U14, 381-0057" <[email protected]>
X-Mts: smtp


Ode helpers,

I'm trying to check out a file against goldos.nightly. It fails as 
follows:

ode.gni> bco kern_aio.c

[ ./kernel/bsd/kern_aio.c ]
stat error: RCS file ./kernel/bsd/kern_aio.c,v is in use
stat error: RCS file ./kernel/bsd/kern_aio.c,v is in use
[ specified revision not found in the history revision ]

Any idea what's up? I checked out other files from kernel/bsd at the
same time this failed. When I do a blog on kern_aio.c, I get the same failure 
messages, then some legitimate-looking rev info, then this:

description:
----------------------------
revision 1.1
date: 1990/01/01 00:00:00;  author: devbld_gsf;  state: Exp;
branches:  1.1.1;  1.1.3;  1.1.4;  1.1.5;  1.1.7;  1.1.10;  1.1.12;  1.1.14;  1.
1.16;
*** Initial Trunk Revision ***
=============================================================================

This doesn't seem quite right. How can we get that file back? The same
exact behavior occurs when I back against goldos. Something must be
sick in the backing tree. Gack.

I do have a valid kerberos ticket.

Thanks for any insights,

Jeff