Coda File System

Re: okay, what am I doing wrong?

From: Rod Van Meter <>
Date: 09 Jan 2003 14:28:56 -0800
On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 14:08, ext Jan Harkes wrote:

> So the laptop is disconnnected, and probably has a conflict that is
> blocking reintegration.
> > [root_at_localhost rdv]# 16:10:37 Checkpointing developers:rdv
> > 16:10:37 to /usr/coda/spool/500/developers_rdv@_coda_rdv.tar
> > 16:10:37 and /usr/coda/spool/500/developers_rdv@_coda_rdv.cml
> > 16:10:37 Reintegrate: developers:rdv, 100/114 records, result = Unknown
> > error 198
> Not sure what 198 is, but reintegration failed. The first entry in
> /usr/coda/spool/500/developers_rdv@_coda_rdv.cml should be the operation
> that is causing the problem.

[rdv_at_localhost rdv]$ more !$
more /usr/coda/spool/500/developers_rdv\@_coda_rdv.cml
Create  /coda/rdv/nokia/la4a58~1.txt
Store   /coda/rdv/nokia/la4a58~1.txt (length = 97994)
Create  /coda/rdv/nokia/la4a5b~1.txt
Store   /coda/rdv/nokia/la4a5b~1.txt (length = 25423)
Create  /coda/rdv/nokia/la4e38~1.txt
Store   /coda/rdv/nokia/la4e38~1.txt (length = 29806)

(there are a couple of dozen files with these goofy names -- don't ask.)

Later in the list there is a file with a space in its name -- is this a
problem?  There's also an RCS directory with "," in the file names.

> Nice, but what is the status of the volume mounted at /coda/rdv?

rdv_at_localhost rdv]$ cfs lv /coda/rdv
  Status of volume 0x7f000001 (2130706433) named "developers:rdv"
  Volume type is Replicated
  Connection State is Disconnected
  Write-back is disabled
  There are 117 CML entries pending for reintegration

> > This, despite the fact that I believe there should be no conflicts, and
> > repair says:
> No conflicts in the codaroot volume, but developers:rdv seems to be the
> problematic one. You can try to search for it with,
>     find /coda/rdv -lname '@*'

Returns nothing.

The set of files is still small enough that I can see that there are no
conflicts.  Everything in the pending .cml is above everything that
already exists, alphabetically, except for the creation of a subdir, so
it's easy to verify visually.  (In fact, seems likely that, for some
reason, this failed partway through the whole set, which gave me this
ordering; they should have all been created at the same time.)

You're right, I was looking at the wrong volume info.  I'm going to go
fiddle with it now (involves switching networks away from where I read
my email).

Received on 2003-01-09 17:37:38