This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center.
Closed 10 years ago.
I have a seemingly normal mercurial repo, but doing a local clone of it leaves out bunches of files…
bash-3.2$ hg verify
repository uses revlog format 1
checking changesets
checking manifests
crosschecking files in changesets and manifests
checking files
486 files, 23 changesets, 568 total revisions
bash-3.2$ hg clone . /tmp/clone
updating to branch default
resolving manifests
getting .hgignore
getting data/Agricultural Marketing Service - Agricultural Marketing Service - Home.html
getting data/SAMPLE_BIZ_FARMERS_MARKETS.XLS
...
130 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
bash-3.2$
[update: the problem was that the original repository was in branch foo; and the clone gets created with the default branch current, which confused me]
Please show hg summary in both the original and the clone. It's possible you're updated to different revisions in each repository. Cloning a repository brings across the changesets, but doesn't update to the same revision as the source.
Also please show hg status for a file that's in the original but not in the clone.
There might be deleted files-- those would be in the repository, but not in the working directory. If I'm not mistaken, "N files updated" refers to the working directory in Mercurial.
Related
Can I say "deleting this file is part of this commit" in hg? I know about hg rm, but it seems to only remove tracking of a file, not track its removal.
Concretely, if I have a repository containing file t in two places (A and B), and at A say hg rm t, and commit, and push, and at B say hg pull -u, file t will be there. :-(
I can't imagine anyone wanting that behaviour actually, but that's not the question. The question is: can I somehow sync working trees via hg, or only existing files?
If you pull, the deleted file will be deleted in your history, but not in your sources, locally. You have to update (hg up) for that.
If you have modified this file, and not committed it, Mercurial will tell you that you have uncommited changes, it won't be able to update.
Once it's commited, the deleted file will conflicts with the modified file, you'll be asked either you want to keep the modified file, or delete it.
This question already has answers here:
Is there any way to delete local commits in Mercurial?
(10 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
I have situation like this:
I have commited files a,b,c,d.Now i found that by mistake i commited
files a and b; so before pushing these changes, i want to do uncommit
files a and b so that i can push only c and d.Can someone tell me how
to do that by using mercurial commands.
Here uncommit means that i dunt want to use "hg out -p" and after that
looking change set and do things manually.
Assuming you haven't performed any other transactions on your repository since you committed the files, I think you could do this as a 2 stage process:
hg rollback
hg commit filec filed
hg rollback should remove the commit that you have just made, but leave the files as changed. Then hg commit filec filed should commit the files named filec & filed. Obviously you should replace these file names with the names of your actual files.
It's probably worth mentioning that you should be careful with hg rollback - it alters the history, so it is possible to lose data with it if used incorrectly.
hg rollback, and you can find more in the Chapter 9. Finding and fixing mistakes of the Mercurial: The Definitive Guide
In mercurial you can use the backout command, which creates a changeset that is the opposite of the changeset you want to backed out. Then this changeset is committed. The only thing you need to do after that is a merge.
You can backout any changeset, but it's not recommended to backout a merge changeset.
A detailed explanation of the command with an example can be found here.
This is what i get when i do hg verify :
repository uses revlog format 1
checking changesets
checking manifests
crosschecking files in changesets and manifests
checking files
includes/base/class/ViewInstanceAdapter.class.php#7: broken revlog! (index data/includes/base/class/ViewInstanceAdapter.class.php.i is corrupted)
warning: orphan revlog 'data/includes/base/class/ViewInstanceAdapter.class.php.i'
158 files, 61 changesets, 270 total revisions
1 warnings encountered!
1 integrity errors encountered!
(first damaged changeset appears to be 7)
I do not use Mercurial for a long time and i don't understand what this means.
(I'm on windows using TortoiseHg, and the project is local only)
As said before (although you already confirmed this doesn’t work), you should start by trying to clone the repository; if the problems are related to the dirstate this can bypass it.
Next, every clone contains a complete repository, so every clone is effectively a back-up. Don’t you have a central server or colleague or another local copy? Try cloning that, then pulling from your corrupted repository. As the first damaged changeset is reported as being no. 7 (out of 270), this should be a pretty old one so likely easy to recover, and hopefully the damage does not prevent Mercurial from pulling changesets beyond that.
A third option you could try is to run a Mercurial-Mercurial conversion on your repository (hg convert repo repo-copy); a verbatim conversion should the keep changeset IDs intact, although it will probably run into the same problem. You could also try to specify a filemap to filter out the ViewInstanceAdapter file.
Because the damaged changeset is so old, and given that Mercurial uses an append-only writing method, the probable cause for this problem is a hardware failure or some kind of random disk corruption.
Note that Mercurial is not a backup system and does not provide redundancy. Making frequent back-ups (which in Mercurial’s case is as easy as a ‘hg push’) is the only way to make sure you don’t lose your precious code.
An alternate cause that I feel I should warn you about are virus scanners or the Windows indexing service. These lock files in a certain way that prevents them from being deleted during short time windows. Although Mercurial does its best to be robust, it is hard to defend against all cases. It is recommended to white-list your repositories, see this note.
I found a solution (Thanks to Laurens Holst) ONLY if you have a clean bakcup (with no error) including the issue revision.
In my problem rev issue is 7 and i have a backup until rev 18.
Steps :
Clone the backup repository at the last common rev (here it is 18)
Pull broken repository revs into cloned one (you have now two heads but no modifications on the working directory of course)
Update cloned repository to the most recent revision (tip)
You have now a working .hg dir :)
Is it possible to backup a filesystem with many Mercurial repositories (e.g., with rsync on the filesystem) and have the backup in an inconsistent state?
The repositories are served by ssh and serves this set of requests: {push, pull, in, out, clone}. It does not have 'hg commit' applied to it directly (which has a known race condition).
Mark Drago is correct that Mercurial writes its own files in a careful order to maintain integrity. However, this is only integrity with regard to other Mercurial clients. The locking design in Mercurial allows one Mercurial process to create a new commit by writing files in this order:
filelogs (holds compressed deltas for all revisions of a given file)
manifest (has pointers back to the filelogs associated with a given changeset)
changelog (has metadata and a pointer back to the manifest for the changeset)
while other Mercurial processes will read the files in this order
changelog
manifest
filelogs
The reader will thus not see a reference to the new filelog data since the changelog is updated last in an atomic operation (a rename, which POSIX requires to be atomic).
A backup program will not know the correct order to read the Mercurial files and so it might read a filelog before it was updated by Mercurial and then read a manifest after it was updated:
rsync reads .hg/store/data/foo.i
hg writes .hg/store/data/foo.i
hg writes .hg/store/00manifest.i
hg writes .hg/store/00changelog.i
rsync reads .hg/store/00manifest.i
rsync reads .hg/store/00changelog.i
The result is a backup with a changelog that points to a manifest that points to a filelog revision that does not exist --- a corrupt repository. Running hg verify on such a repository will detect this situation:
checking changesets
checking manifests
crosschecking files in changesets and manifests
checking files
foo#1: f57bae649f6e in manifests not found
1 files, 2 changesets, 1 total revisions
1 integrity errors encountered!
(first damaged changeset appears to be 1)
This tells you that the manifest of revision 1 refers to revision f57bae649f6e of the file foo, which cannot be found. It is possible to repair this situation by making a clone that excludes the bad revision 1:
$ hg clone -r 0 . ../repo-fixed
adding changesets
adding manifests
adding file changes
added 1 changesets with 1 changes to 1 files
updating to branch default
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ cd ../repo-fixed
$ hg verify
checking changesets
checking manifests
crosschecking files in changesets and manifests
checking files
1 files, 1 changesets, 1 total revisions
So, all in all, it is not that bad if you use a general backup program to backup your Mercurial repositories. Just be aware that you might have to repair a broken repository after you restore it from backup. The changeset you lose will most likely still be on the developer's machine and he can push it again after you repair the restored repository. The Mercurial wiki has more information on repairing repository corruption.
The completely safe way to backup a repository is of course to use hg clone, but it might not be practical to integrate this with a general backup strategy.
Why don't "backup" it with just hg clone? ;-)
The short answer is: You can copy (cp, rsync, etc.) a mercurial repository without problems.
The longer answer is: https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/Presentations?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=ols-mercurial-paper.pdf (in particular section 5, sub-heading "Committing Changes").
Mercurial writes out changes in an order that makes it safe for any other process to read a mercurial repository at any time. If you copy a repository to some other location while a change is being made to the repository, you'll get some of the new data, but mercurial is smart enough to ignore partially written commits. When you use the copy you made as a mercurial repository you will either see the new commit or not, there will not be any corruption.
I just did hg pull on a repository and brought in some changesets. It said to run hg update, so I did. Unfortunately, when I did that, it failed with the following error message:
abort: integrity check failed on 00manifest.i:173!
When I run hg verify, it tells me there are a number of issues with things not in the manifest (with some slight path obscuring):
>hg verify
checking changesets
checking manifests
crosschecking files in changesets and manifests
somewhere1/file1.aspx#172: in changeset but not in manifest
somewhere2/file1.pdf#170: in changeset but not in manifest checking files
file3.csproj#172: ee005cae8058 not in manifests
somewhere2/file1.pdf#171: 00371c8b9d95 not in manifests
somewhere3/file1.ascx#170: 5c921d9bf620 not in manifests
somewhere4/file1.ascx#172: 23acbd0efd3a not in manifests
somewhere5/file1.aspx#170: ce48ed795067 not in manifests
somewhere5/file2.aspx#171: 15d13df4206f not in manifests
1328 files, 174 changesets, 3182 total revisions
8 integrity errors encountered!
(first damaged changeset appears to be 170)
The source repository passes hg verify just fine.
Is there any way to recover from an integrity check failure or do I need to re-clone the repository completely from the source (not a huge issue in this case)? What could I have done to cause this, so I don't do it again?
Well, since the first damaged changeset is 170, you could clone your local repository to 169 and then pull from the source. That means only pulling 5 changesets.
hg clone -r 169 damagedrepo fixedrepo
cd fixedreop
hg verify
And then:
hg pull originalsource
As for manual recovery of repository corruption, this page expounds on that better than I can. See section 4:
I have found corruption once in a while before, and although the above
documentation says it is usually from user error, my instances were on
removable USB drives with empty working directories. Sometimes things
just don't get written correctly or are interfered with somehow: it's
not always user error. But I always have multiple copies I can reclone
from so I've been able to get away with basic fixing.
If the simple fix of a partial local clone and pulling from the server doesn't fix it, you're down to 2 options after backing up your changes (if any) to a bundle or patches:
Manually hacking at Mercurial's files.
Doing a new full clone from the server. Usually the easier and faster of the two.
Beware: This method will change all hashes.
Actually there is another way to recover the repository when it is corrupted like this -
You can do a complete rebuild of the repository by using the convert extension. See Section 4.5 on https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/RepositoryCorruption#Recovery_using_convert_extension
First enable the convert extension by adding the following to your ~/.hgrc file
[extensions]
convert=
Then convert the bad repo to create a fixed repo:
$ hg convert --config convert.hg.ignoreerrors=True REPO REPOFIX
This worked for me when I had the experience of suddenly finding that there were missing files in the manifests - "error 255".
Try remove your file 00manifest.i from repo and next use hg remove 00manifest.i and hg commit commands. Worked for me.
What we ended up doing was making a new copy of our 'central' repository, deleting the .hg folder in this copy, creating a new repository there (hg init), and then working with this as the central repository.
Be aware however this is only an appropriate solution if you don't need your changeset history other than as a reference (which we don't). You can still use your old central repository for this purpose.