NoSuchRevision in diff when a ghost introduced the modified text.

BTW, I'm still having problems with this using bzr-svn revision 1741 on the 0.4 branch, so I don't think this is a duplicate of bug #277043

My apologies, you were right. This is actually a different bug, in bzr. I think there already is a bug report open about this, but I can't find it at the moment.

Searching for nosuchrevision in bzr bugs turns up a few candidates for duplicates:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bugs?field.searchtext=nosuchrevision&orderby=-importance&search=Search&assignee_option=any&field.assignee=&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug_supervisor=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=&field.omit_dupes.used=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.has_patch.used=&field.has_cve.used=&field.tag=&field.tags_combinator=ANY

It's definitely different from any of those.

From IRC yesterday:

22:42 < jelmer> lifeless, basically it's similar to the bug we looked at during the summer
22:43 * jelmer looks again
22:43 < jelmer> lifeless, sorry, it's actually related to ghosts
22:44 < jelmer> where "bzr diff" assumes that the revision info for the last-changed-revision of all files in the tree are present
22:49 < lifeless> jelmer: I can't parse that. Is a valid rephrasing 'the last-changed-revision is used as the key for the file text'?
22:49 < jelmer> lifeless, nope
22:50 < jelmer> lifeless, bzr diff prints the timestamp of the original text of a file and of the new revised one
22:51 < lifeless> with you so far
22:51 < jelmer> in order to obtain the timestamp for the old text, it uses the text revision and calls Repository.get_revision(text_revision)
22:51 < jelmer> if that text_revision happens to be a ghost, things break
22:51 < lifeless> ah
22:51 < lifeless> so there are some interactions here
22:52 -!- ia [n=ia@89.169.165.188] has joined #bzr
22:52 < lifeless> we really need to sit down and clean up the ghost handling once and for all
22:52 < lifeless> the interaction I'm thinking of is: we only copy text (id,X) when we copy revision X
22:52 < lifeless> so that repository isn't clonable by bzr at all anyhow
22:52 < lifeless> (as it currently stands)
22:53 < jelmer> that would break bzr-svn, which usually only pushes lhs revisions
22:53 < jelmer> that may contain references to texts introduced by rhs revisions
22:54 < jelmer> *those lhs revisions may contain references to texts introduced by rhs revisions
22:56 -!- oleavr [<email address hidden>] has joined #bzr
22:57 < lifeless> jelmer: 'does break'
22:58 < lifeless> jelmer: though I think I've mentioned before that having those references isn't strictly valid
22:58 < lifeless> under the current rules. And thus the need to fix this forever
22:59 < lifeless> the inventory work being done at the moment will open the door to handling this efficiently and preserving arbitrary revision text values, which would make the revision-being-absent a valid bug

I was wondering if there is any update on this, or at least a workaround? This bug prevents me from using bzr and launchpad, which is rather detrimental for development...

Thanks a lot!

Peter

I've just hit this this morning with bzr 1.13 final and bzr-svn 0.5.4dev:

0.032 bzr arguments: [u'diff']
0.044 looking for plugins in /Volumes/Crossroads/bahamut/.bazaar/plugins
0.089 looking for plugins in /Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/plugins
0.187 opening working tree '/<path>/sandbox'
0.498 Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/commands.py", line 716, in exception_to_return_code
    return the_callable(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/commands.py", line 911, in run_bzr
    ret = run(*run_argv)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/commands.py", line 547, in run_argv_aliases
    return self.run(**all_cmd_args)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/commands.py", line 926, in ignore_pipe
    result = func(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/builtins.py", line 1768, in run
    extra_trees=extra_trees, using=using)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/diff.py", line 428, in show_diff_trees
    return differ.show_diff(specific_files, extra_trees)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/diff.py", line 833, in show_diff
    return self._show_diff(specific_files, extra_trees)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/diff.py", line 893, in _show_diff
    self.diff(file_id, oldpath, newpath)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/diff.py", line 916, in diff
    new_path, old_kind, new_kind)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/diff.py", line 494, in _diff_many
    new_kind)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/diff.py", line 616, in diff
    old_date = _patch_header_date(self.old_tree, file_id, old_path)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/diff.py", line 440, in _patch_header_date
    mtime = tree.get_file_mtime(file_id, path)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/workingtree_4.py", line 1662, in get_file_mtime
    return self._repository.get_revision(last_changed_revision).timestamp
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/decorators.py", line 138, in read_locked
    result = unbound(self, *args, **kwargs)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/repofmt/knitrepo.py", line 214, in get_revision
    return self.get_revision_reconcile(revision_id)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/decorators.py", line 138, in read_locked
    result = unbound(self, *args, **kwargs)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/repository.py", line 1280, in get_revision_reconcile
    return self._get_revisions([revision_id])[0]
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/decorators.py", line 138, in read_locked
    result = unbound(self, *args, **kwargs)
  File "/Library/Python/2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/repository.py", line 1298, in _get_revisions
    raise errors.NoSuchRevision(self, record.key[0])
NoSuchRevision: KnitPackRepository('file://<path>/.bzr/repository/') has no revision svn-v4:be02940b-5f7b-422b-ba6c-1eb93f4884eb:<url>/branches/<branch name>:9673

The command was executed in a lightweight checkout of a native bzr branch whose parent is a remote SVN branch.

marking this as high as it's a blocker for quite a few people

If this is the "fetch doesn't transmit texts introduced in a ghost" that seems to be the IRC conversation with lifeless, then it should be marked "Fix Released" as he landed a patch just last week that does the "set difference".

Namely revno 4117:
message:
  (robertc) Handle inconsistent inventories in fetch more robustly.
   (Robert Collins)

No, it's about diff trying to reproduce the modification time of ghost revisions if a text revision introduced in a ghost is part of the diffed tree.

We should port this to 2.0.6/2.0.7