-
Bug
-
Resolution: Unresolved
-
Minor
-
p4plugin 1.13.3
PROBLEM REPORT - UNABLE TO REPRODUCE THIS
When using P4Groovy to resolve an integration the following error was seen:
19:21:01 Key: fromFile Value: //depot1/test/path1/path2/src-of-branch/path3/path5/file.txt 19:21:01 [Pipeline] echo 19:21:01 Key: fmt0 Value: %depotFile% - can't move (already opened for %badAction%) 19:21:01 [Pipeline] echo 19:21:01 Key: badAction Value: move/add 19:21:01 [Pipeline] echo 19:21:01 Key: code0 Value: 301996520 19:21:01 [Pipeline] echo 19:21:01 Key: depotFile Value: //jenkins-jenkins-slave-1-TestAutoMerge-0/depot1/test/pa
We could not find the file already open anywhere and the 'depotFile' seemed to be incorrectly truncated in all problem occurrences.
It may be a normal behavior for a file that was already open but could not diagnose it. The file history includes a rename so the source of the file has two parents in revision graph. Maybe P4Java has a problem with that? (again unable to repro).
The workaround was to drop to using P4 command line instead of P4Groovy.
Below is a test job I created to try and reproduce the problem:
pipeline {
agent any
options {
timestamps()
disableConcurrentBuilds()
} stages
{
stage ('Auto Merge myBranch') {
steps {
script {
def p4 = p4 credential: 'JenkinsMaster',
workspace:
manualSpec(charset: 'none',
cleanup: false,
name: 'jenkins-${NODE_NAME}-${JOB_NAME}-${EXECUTOR_NUMBER}',
pinHost: false,
spec:
clientSpec(allwrite: false,
backup: true,
changeView: '',
clobber: true,
compress: false,
line: 'LOCAL',
locked: false,
modtime: false,
rmdir: false,
serverID: '',
streamName: '',
type: 'WRITABLE',
view:
'''//depot/... //${CLIENT}/depot/...'''))
echo("P4 OPENED 1: " + p4.run('opened').toString())
echo("P4 INTEGRATE " + p4.run('integrate', '//depot/path1/...@133,@136', "//depot1/test/path1/path2/src-of-branch/...").toString())
echo("P4 OPENED 2: " + p4.run('opened').toString())
echo("P4 RESOLVE: " + p4.run('resolve', '-as').toString())
p4.run('revert', '//...')
// p4.run('submit','-d','Test')
}
}
} }
}
If anyone see's this behavior or reproduces it please update this job.
