Topic: Subversion 1.4.6 and Apache 2.2.8 (Apachelounge Build)

[Squirre1]

I really could use some help here..

I have downloaded Apache 2.2.8 from Apachelounge and Subversion 1.4.6 to setup a source repository.. Everything works great except for one piece. I can not Lock files in the Repository. I receive the following error:

Client: Lock request failed: 400 Bad Request (http://192.168.25.2)
apache error.log: [Thu Mar 27 19:37:10 2008] [error] [client 192.168.25.9] Tried to attach multiple locks to a resource. [400, #405]

I have done some research and located the below thread:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Locks-return-%27Bad-Request%27-tt15724256.html#a15736153

I have spoken with Joel in reference to the link and he asked me to try the ASF installation.

With same install/config with Apache 2.2.8 from ASF, it works...

I have used the ApacheLounge releases from 2.2.3 and would love to continue to use them.. Is this something that could be corrected in the source used by apachelounge and be recompiled..

Thanks

[tdonovan]

The problem seems to be Microsoft compiler incompatibilities, not source code changes.

Apache from ASF is built with Visual C++ 6.0 (i.e. VC6)

Apache from Apache Lounge is built with Visual Studio 2005 (i.e. VS8)

I built mod_svn 1.4.6 and Berkeley DB 4.4.20 from the source code using VS8 per the notes in this post, although problem #3 (the merge problem) no longer applies so I didn't make change #3.

It works OK for me with Apache Lounge 2.2.8 - including the svn lock and unlock subcommands.
You can download it from http://www.tomdonovan.net/download/Apache228_svn_146.zip.

If you use this mod_svn, please post how it works for you.
I would also be curious if you use any bdb (Berkeley DB) repositories, or just the regular fs repositories with Subversion.

-tom-

[Squirre1]

Your Subversion Module builds worked for my Apachelounge 2.2.8 installation.. Thanks...

I use the FS repository, so i can not comment on BDB...

Thanks for the quick response..

[tdonovan]

A few additional notes about Apache228_svn_146:

Apache228_svn_146 works with Apache 2.2.x built with either VS8 (Visual Studio 2005) or VS9 (Visual Studio 2008).

The "Visual C++ 2005 SP1 Redistributable Package (x86)" must be installed.
This is in addition to the "Visual C++ 2008 Redistributable Package (x86)" which is required if Apache was built with VS9.


Apache228_svn_146 does *NOT* work with Apache built with VC6 (i.e. it does not work with ASF Apache)

Some common functions may appear to work, but not all functions will work reliably because of the difference in 32-bit vs. 64-bit time formats.
Using this module with ASF Apache from apache.org may cause Apache to fail with access violation errors.


Subversion claims that mod_dav_svn should not be used with Apache versions earlier than version 2.2.4.

See: http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ProjectDocumentList?folderID=8100
I don't know why Subversion claims that Apache 2.2.3 and earlier cannot be used, but it is probably best to stick with their minimum Apache version requirement of 2.2.4.


Apache228_svn_146 does not require Subversion to be installed on the Apache system (i.e. it is self-contained).

Users will want to have Subversion 1.4.x installed on some machine to create new repositories and to backup repositories, because these operations cannot be done through Apache.


Apache228_svn_146 works with any Subversion repositories created with Subversion 1.4.0 or higher, including both 'fs' and 'bdb' type repositories.

-tom-

[tdonovan]

Steffen has added this module to the Apache Lounge Downloads page as svn-1.4.6-w32.zip.

Thanks Steffen!

-tom-

[Squirre1]

Sweet, thanks again Tom.... And thanks Steffan for adding them to the downloads page..

[Squirre1]

I have not checked yet, but are these modules still compatible with the new subversion release as well as the new appache release... If not how hard would I have to be to get them recompiled for those releases..

Thanks Guys,

Squirre1

[Squirre1]

Actually I just tested yesterday and no the modules report as being subversion 1.4.6 still

How much does one need to beg to ask you to recompile the 1.5.0 module for subversion...

[Squirre1]

!!bump!! Now they are at subversion 1.5.1... Is anyone able to build the Subversion Modules that are supported by the Apachelounge 2.2.9a installation..

Thanks...

[James Blond]

I use the officel once and it works fine.

[tdonovan]

Building is pretty easy - it's the testing which is a time-consuming chore.

I could use some help testing Subversion 1.5.1 modules for the Apache Lounge 2.2.9a distribution.

The build is at http://www.tomdonovan.net/download/mod_svn-1.5.1-w32.zip
Note that this build is definitely not ready for production use until it gets some testing!

To test this with both 1.4 and 1.5 clients, you will need the Subversion Windows command-line binaries for both 1.4.6 and 1.5.1.
They are available at http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ProjectDocumentList?folderID=8100.

Some of the things which need thorough testing are:

* bdb repositories (no, I don't use them either - but a public distribution must work right with everything)

* the new features, like Merge Tracking, Sparse checkouts, and Interactive Conflict Resolution with a 1.5 repository using a 1.5 client.

* everything still works OK (except new features) with repositories (both fs & bdb) created with Subversion 1.4 using either a 1.4 or 1.5 client

* everything works OK (including new features) with repositories created with Subversion 1.5 using either a 1.4 (except some new features) or 1.5 client

* everything works OK (including new features) with repositories upgraded from 1.4 to 1.5

The svn lock and svn unlock commands have been troublesome in the past. They seem to work OK with this build for me, but feedback from a different environment would be great. Note that these svn commands require either Apache authentication or Subversion authentication to be set up.

The main changes to support the AL distribution of Apache concern time & date fields - so please scrutinize the exact times & dates in svn log listings, etc.

Large repositories are another thing to test. I've tried loading, checking-out, changing, checking-in, and dumping a 5,000-file repository with both fs and bdb a few times; but another set of eyeballs would be nice.

If anyone can find time to help, please post exactly what you've tested - including the repository version, client version, and whether it was a fs or bdb repository.

Thanks,
-tom-