Re: [Tools-implementation] Fwd: Emacs lock files in rfc rsync

Glen <glen@amsl.com> Tue, 09 February 2021 18:55 UTC

Return-Path: <glen@amsl.com>
X-Original-To: tools-implementation@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-implementation@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A1F03A1132 for <tools-implementation@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 10:55:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_WELCOMELIST=-0.01, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C_ZNLdiQ_50t for <tools-implementation@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 10:55:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D8153A1130 for <tools-implementation@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 10:55:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ACED38AEB9 for <tools-implementation@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 10:55:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.86.10] (173-8-133-94-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.8.133.94]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 381A838AEA1 for <tools-implementation@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 10:55:46 -0800 (PST)
To: tools-implementation@ietf.org
References: <4a72d3ce-c790-a190-b3de-f4bd10337e39@amsl.com> <4474bb5c-bb5b-d708-1f8a-de8e90ce0619@amsl.com> <c727905c-f25d-2e0c-90aa-e0b335018051@nostrum.com>
From: Glen <glen@amsl.com>
Organization: AMS
Message-ID: <a7f22bce-a461-e707-3ea3-99766042742e@amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2021 10:55:46 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c727905c-f25d-2e0c-90aa-e0b335018051@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-implementation/kEz1qHsS8ZiWDqOPDh9E2DqW4pU>
Subject: Re: [Tools-implementation] Fwd: Emacs lock files in rfc rsync
X-BeenThere: tools-implementation@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Tools Implementation <tools-implementation.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-implementation>, <mailto:tools-implementation-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-implementation/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-implementation@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-implementation-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-implementation>, <mailto:tools-implementation-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2021 18:55:51 -0000

Agreed on all counts from my point of view.

Glen

On 2/9/2021 10:53, Robert Sparks wrote:
> For the short term, I propose that we delete and resync what's at our 
> ::rfc sync point so it matches the rfceditor exactly.
> 
> Does anyone know of a reason not to do that?
> 
> We can then discuss removing it as an exposed sync point.
> 
> RjS
> 
> On 2/4/21 5:40 PM, Glen wrote:
>> Something we should review in our next meeting.   I'll provide the 
>> technical details at that time.  (Roman, sorry I forgot to cc you on 
>> the original reply, I missed your presence in the header until after I 
>> hit send, but this is the same email reply below.)
>>
>> Glen
>>
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: Re: Fwd: Emacs lock files in rfc rsync
>> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2021 15:38:02 -0800
>> From: Glen <glen@amsl.com>
>> Organization: AMS
>> To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
>> CC: Sandy Ginoza <sginoza@amsl.com>, Alice Russo <arusso@amsl.com>, 
>> John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
>>
>> All -
>>
>> In the interest of time, I am just grouping everyone together and 
>> replying to this thread directly.
>>
>>>> From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
>>>> Subject: Emacs lock files in rfc rsync
>>>> Date: February 4, 2021 at 1:06:27 PM PST
>>>> To: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Roman Danyliw 
>>>> <rdd@cert.org>
>>>> Hi folks.
>>>> I just rsynced the rfc directory and I see that several of the files 
>>>> have Emacs lock files [0] associated with them:
>>>> lrwxrwxrwx  1 ekr  staff  39 Mar 16  2016 .#bcp-ref.txt -> 
>>>> ahagens@rfcpa.amsl.com.16317:1457089460
>>>> lrwxrwxrwx  1 ekr  staff  39 Mar 27  2019 .#rfc-index.xml -> 
>>>> ahagens@rfcpa.amsl.com.12369:1551880913
>>>> Aside from just creating problems when someone else tries to edit 
>>>> the files in Emacs, it suggests that you might have some kind of 
>>>> process problem, because this material should be machine generated, 
>>>> and people shouldn't be editing it in a way that the directories are 
>>>> just raw synced to the server.
>>
>> Eric -
>>
>> My apologies, but you are not using the authoritative source for your 
>> rsync.  You stated that you're using:
>>
>>> rsync.ietf.org::rfc
>>
>> That is the IETF's legacy mirror of RFCs.  I do not refer or recommend 
>> it.  It appears to be a legacy configuration, and to have some 
>> duplication in it.  Moreover, for reasons unknown to me, it is being 
>> rsynced without the --delete option, which means it will retain every 
>> file it ever saw during any prior rsync.  That is why you are seeing 
>> those files.  They existed at some interval in the past; they do not 
>> exist (on the RFC servers) now.
>>
>> I will raise this with the Tools Implementation Team to see if (a) 
>> this behavior should change or (b) the IETF copy should be removed or 
>> referred.  Removing files from it, or making changes to it, are not 
>> things I can "just do" on my own in my role.  Note that they are 
>> working on other, larger projects right now, so this will need some 
>> time before it can get attention.
>>
>> In the meantime, I recommend that you change your configuration to 
>> rsync your RFCs from rfc-editor.org:: , which is the authoritative 
>> source for RFCs.  They have a catalog of options, one of which will I 
>> hope suit:
>>
>> # rsync rfc-editor.org::
>> everything-ftp  Everything FTP
>> refs            XML references for RFCs (for use with xml2rfc)
>> rfcs            Contents of in-notes including subdirectories std, 
>> bcp, fyi, and ien
>> rfcs-text-only  Only the text files from the directories in [rfcs]
>> rfc-ed-all      Entire repository (excluding internet-drafts)
>> internet-drafts Internet Drafts
>> ids-text-only   Only text files from the Internet Drafts mirror
>> rfcs-pdf-only   PDF versions of ASCII RFCs to ensure correct page 
>> breaks, etc
>> rfcs-exclude-json       Contents of [rfcs] excluding JSON files
>> rfcs-json-only  Only the JSON files from the directories in [rfcs]
>>
>> In the meantime, the files you referred to, which may exist on the 
>> legacy IETF copy, will not be removed, nor will any other changes be 
>> made to the IETF copy, until the Tools Implementation Team can carve 
>> out time to review this and determine the correct solution.
>>
>> I will send the relevant information to them now, to get this on their 
>> radar.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Glen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>