Re: Upstream cvs repository corruption?

[Jim Meyering <jim at meyering dot net>]

Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@sourceware.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:04:00PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
>>I nearly Cc'd Frank about this (to thank him for helping to set up git
>>recently :-), but thought better of it, and am Cc'ing overseers, instead.
>>
>>Of course, the real solution is to switch to git,
>>but lvm will have to wait a few weeks for that ;-)
>
> In the meantime I've noticed quite a few long-running processes owned by
> you running on sourceware.  Having long-running user-owned processes is

As far as I know, there was one incident.  Frank told me you noticed some,
and I killed them right away.  Did I not kill them quickly enough? :-) 1/2
About 10 minutes elapsed on Saturday, between when I heard about the
problem and when they were all dead.

BTW, I don't know what made that happen (a defunct cvs process was
at the root of each of two process trees).  If it happens again, I'll
investigate.  Normal mirror-sync runs are very quick.

> not really a good practice given the principle of "what happens if he's
> hit by a bus?"

They weren't consuming significant resources, so
I don't see the problem with those few delinquent processes.

If you mean the mirroring service, I see that as a short-term
project, since Alasdair is interested in converting to git.
If the mirroring were expected to last more than a few weeks, I'd be
interested in moving the cron jobs to a role-based account.
If you'd prefer, I'll do that anyway, but it doesn't seem worthwhile
at this point.

> Should your git-related processes be owned by someone other than you?
> Would that solve both problems?