<file> is read-only but may contains modifications

If you are having a problem using SourceOffSite, post a message here.

Moderator: SourceGear

Post Reply
brettv
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 1:07 pm

<file> is read-only but may contains modifications

Post by brettv » Thu Mar 18, 2004 1:21 pm

"<file> is read-only but may contains modifications - replace it?"

I get this message EVERY time I try to do a Get Latest Version from Visual Studio .NET using SourceOffSite 3.5.3, even though I don't have any of the files checked out and have not modified them. In the SourceOffSite UI, the files show up as Renegade. The only time this does not happen is if I do a second Get Latest Version of the same project immediately after the first.

Does anyone know if there is a fix for this? Or if this problem is resolved in version 4.0? It is REALLY annoying when I go a Get Latest Version of a sln with 30+ projects -- I have to hit "Yes To All" 30+ times!!!

Thanks for any help you can provide!
Brett

corey
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 10:13 am

Post by corey » Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:23 pm

If you are positive that you haven't modified any of the files, then the simpliest way to resolve this would be to exit VS.NET and using the SOS GUI Client, perform a Get Latest from the root of the solution. When it prompts you about overwriting, choose Yes to All, as you've been doing within the IDE. Once that's complete and the file statuses are no longer Renegade, then you should be able to restart VS.NET and the problem should no longer occur.

The bigger question is why all of your files are Renegade to begin with. Renegade means that you do not have the files Checked Out, but that the modification time of the file has changed from when you first retrieved the file using SOS. Would you have done anything on your machine that would have caused the mod dates of those files to change?

brettv
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 1:07 pm

Post by brettv » Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:49 pm

Because it takes so long to open a solution w/ VS.NET & SOS, I tend to work with more than one solution open at a time (i.e. more than one VS.NET window open). Sometimes I do a Get Latest Version in one window and sometimes in the other. How does SOS remember what the file modification time should be? Is there a way that a Get Latest Version in one window could make the SOS in the other VS.NET confused about what the modification time should be?

Is there any way to use the file time from SourceSafe rather than the date of the Get Latest Version? I believe this is what SourceSafe does and that might prevent SOS from getting confused...

corey
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 10:13 am

Post by corey » Thu Mar 18, 2004 4:19 pm

Yes, running two instances of VS.NET with integrated SOS 3.5 could cause files in one instance to appear Renegade. The fetch date of files are stored by SOS in cache files called *.sos files. SOS compares the date at which it fetches a file with the current mod date to determine Edited and Renegade status. Running two clients at once and performing Get Latest operations with one instance and other operations with the other will cause problems like you are seeing.

The file time from SourceSafe would not work as a test of file modification on the client.

brettv
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 1:07 pm

Post by brettv » Thu Mar 18, 2004 6:06 pm

Acutally I just tested doing a SOS Get Latest Version in VS.NET with only one instance (on einwdow open) and then did another one and still got the same message, so something is definnitely fubared with SOS. Is it possible for the cache files to get corrupted? Or is the cache a limited size and can't hold information about all the files I use?

corey
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 10:13 am

Post by corey » Thu Mar 18, 2004 8:25 pm

No, there is no limit to the size of the cache file.

See my first note... try exiting VS.NET and perform a Get Latest using the SOS GUI Client and once that finishes correctly and file statuses are no longer Renegade, then close the GUI Client and restart VS.NET

Post Reply