From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: bazaar: "unable to obtain lock" Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 01:44:46 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87my11gmf4.fsf@red-bean.com> <87fx6sqbnt.fsf@blah.blah> <877hs4m1dh.fsf@telefonica.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262220325 22678 80.91.229.12 (31 Dec 2009 00:45:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 00:45:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 31 01:45:16 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NQ9AB-0006qu-4c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2009 01:45:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59022 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NQ9AB-0008L5-Ht for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:45:15 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NQ9A7-0008Ks-D0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:45:11 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NQ9A3-0008KB-29 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:45:11 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56136 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NQ9A2-0008K8-T0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:45:06 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-yx0-f191.google.com ([209.85.210.191]:63576) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NQ9A2-0007r2-JF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:45:06 -0500 Original-Received: by yxe29 with SMTP id 29so35217371yxe.14 for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 16:45:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=y326YBjQyxB5SVeY73Fb2ZVIe63aKG4BOq9cyviKUoo=; b=wPDAQ5tQTnCJJBugRKlvLMTgyzFi648J4Xe7SscxL+DsKxLkKkbU8aK5FTWtAr1+4v 7/pf+toBnwGH31rkmrjMjCIDdFL779vjcrlyLr07RFj6dJ3LJssOkB1nz3tLfwrAiee0 Hlxw/IrH8rOIA/dvfczLTXUh9NdQq8OcVHbZE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=PeycRFOlzU9lN0WbxK+uXIsi3eUg7IubxvGhlj7++SDhAbT+8mJsjlK9HTw/dSqyc9 0AkNEp1NR4UVtlVslRq+kV0HUS8wkgnBki6e2Jk8+4B9o55oCY8CCRuWbSDZW6kUQxBl 3r+u3yxpE0BjNoXD4LNe0Z4248HYlcLOgKVg8= Original-Received: by 10.101.169.39 with SMTP id w39mr1524336ano.127.1262220306101; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 16:45:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <877hs4m1dh.fsf@telefonica.net> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:119088 Archived-At: On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 1:30 AM, =C3=93scar Fuentes wrote: > > A tarball with a lightweight checkout would require 31 MB. The bad news > is that if your connection is so slow that a 300 MB download is > unacceptable, you will have problems with the network inefficiency of > bzr over http/sftp. A simple update after a few days can easily require > to transfer 10 MB. A commit can be very expensive too at times. A > lightweight checkout needs to contact upstream for almost everything. Can someone please explain what is going on? Shouldn't this be fixed, or?