ProcessCommandListChangeSet returns no files modified

Post your questions regarding using the Vault and Fortress API in your programs.

Moderator: SourceGear

Post Reply
smartbear
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:13 am
Contact:

ProcessCommandListChangeSet returns no files modified

Post by smartbear » Tue Nov 25, 2008 9:39 am

This issue is still occurring with the latest 4.1.2 client API we're using (from viewtopic.php?f=32&t=10824), i.e., ProcessCommandListChangeset returns no files modified when there are modified files. At other times, it returns all files modified.

This occurs on a customer's system who was the 4.1.2.18185 client installed, using CVS-style checkouts. The customer says there are no other users or other applications touching the files. Setting "Detect modified files using CRC's" fixed the issue temporarily, later the issue returned.

I'm attaching the Vault client api logging of the ProcessCommandListChangeset call.

Eric
Attachments
ccollab_vault42625.txt
vault client api debug log
(24.59 KiB) Downloaded 497 times

shannon

Re: ProcessCommandListChangeSet returns no files modified

Post by shannon » Tue Nov 25, 2008 4:21 pm

Can you try the 4.1.4 api?

smartbear
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:13 am
Contact:

Re: ProcessCommandListChangeSet returns no files modified

Post by smartbear » Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:53 am

Do you think (or know) that 4.1.4 has fixed this issue, or something related to it? This behavior has been around for almost a year (since the 4.0.5 client). Does the logging tell you anything?

Will the 4.1.4 client API work with the customer's 4.1.2 client?

shannon

Re: ProcessCommandListChangeSet returns no files modified

Post by shannon » Wed Nov 26, 2008 12:03 pm

From what I understand, you're using the jars. There was a java-specific issue fixed recently having to do with bad dates. There is nothing in the log that definitively tells me your problem is caused by that issue, but it's likely. 4.1.2 is compatible with 4.1.4.

smartbear
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:13 am
Contact:

Re: ProcessCommandListChangeSet returns no files modified

Post by smartbear » Mon Dec 01, 2008 11:37 am

Your latest Java CLC client (vaultJavaCLC_4_1_3_18336) reproduces this issue.

With a 4.1.2 client installed, with files checked out from vaultdemo.sourcegear.com "Repository A", and with CVS-style checkouts selected, and "Detect modified files with CRCs" unselected, running the vault.cmd "listchangeset" command returns all files in the repository as modified.

Is this perhaps an issue with the 4.1.2 client, as opposed to the API? If so, we could request that the customer upgrade: I'd be reluctant to do that without knowing that's the case.

BTW, the 4.1.3 18336 release is dated 9/16/2008, a couple days earlier than the 18339 release from 9/18 we're currently using.

Eric

shannon

Re: ProcessCommandListChangeSet returns no files modified

Post by shannon » Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:57 pm

Sorry, we found a problem with the 4.1.4 Eclipse plug-in late Wednesday. Although I don't think it's causing a problem in the JavaCLC, we took the 4.1.4 JavaCLC down as a precaution while we investigate the Eclipse problem. I still think your problem is api, not client. As soon as we get this figured out, I'd still like you to give the 4.1.4 api a try. I'll update here as soon as we get this other problem figured out.

shannon

Re: ProcessCommandListChangeSet returns no files modified

Post by shannon » Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:26 pm

Ok, the 4.1.4 api is back up on the webpage. Go ahead and give that a try.

smartbear
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:13 am
Contact:

Re: ProcessCommandListChangeSet returns no files modified

Post by smartbear » Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:08 pm

:( Same thing with 4.1.4.18419 - "vault.cmd listchangeset" shows all files modified. The Pending Change Set in the 4.1.2.18185 Vault Client shows just 3 files

Eric

shannon

Re: ProcessCommandListChangeSet returns no files modified

Post by shannon » Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:17 pm

Ok, thanks for checking. We did fix a date problem in 4.1.4, so you should use that if you can. We'll look into this, but keep using CRCs for now.

Post Reply