[gentoo-science] website python error

[gentoo-science] website python error

[Nuno Sucena Almeida]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 168 bytes --]

Hello,
	while visiting the gentoo science overlay website I get python errors, which 
disapear when I reload the page, but keeps popping up randomly...

						Nuno
-- 

[-- Attachment #2: error-gentoo-science-snapshot1.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 153623 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Andrey G. Grozin]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Nuno Sucena Almeida wrote:
> 	while visiting the gentoo science overlay website I get python errors, which 
> disapear when I reload the page, but keeps popping up randomly...
Yes, this is exactly what I have reported some time ago. No progress yet 
:-(

By the way, why there is no link to gentooscience.org from 
overlays.gentoo.org? It seems that there is still no regular way to find 
gentooscience.org; only those fortunate few who already know about its 
existence can use it :-(

Andrey
-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1604 bytes --]

On Wednesday 13 September 2006 15:07, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Nuno Sucena Almeida wrote:
> > 	while visiting the gentoo science overlay website I get python errors,
> > which disapear when I reload the page, but keeps popping up randomly...
>
> Yes, this is exactly what I have reported some time ago. No progress yet
>
> :-(
>
> By the way, why there is no link to gentooscience.org from
> overlays.gentoo.org? It seems that there is still no regular way to find
> gentooscience.org; only those fortunate few who already know about its
> existence can use it :-(

I never received an email about the issue, but when I saw the post you made to 
this list I investigated and fixed the issue. I cannot reproduce this issue 
now at all. It is an amd64 Gentoo hardened web server - I will see about 
rebuilding apache, mod_python, trac etc.

Not sure about the links from the overlays.g.o, gentooscience.org was created 
before the overlays think had even been discussed as a solution to a problem. 
It is advertised here, and on the IRC channel but it would be good to get it 
more widely advertised. 

If trac has issues this does not actually effect subversion or overlay 
checkout/updates/use. I am not sure how effective trac really is on an 
ongoing basis.

I do read these lists when I get the time, but I hate to have to tell you guys 
I am swamped in real life writing up my thesis, writing papers and looking 
for a job to pay the bills... My time is severely limited right now and that 
will probably remain so until Xmas, may be November...

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Andrey G. Grozin]

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> Not sure about the links from the overlays.g.o, gentooscience.org was created 
> before the overlays think had even been discussed as a solution to a problem. 
> It is advertised here, and on the IRC channel but it would be good to get it 
> more widely advertised. 
Yes. Now there is a link path from www.gentoo.org to overlays.gentoo.org, 
and there is no link path from www.gentoo.org to gentooscience.org. And 
this means that the whole world knows about the overlays at 
overlays.gentoo.org, and nobody (except a few developers subscribed to 
this list) knows about gentooscience.org.

By the way, overlays.gentooscience.org uses trac and works stable.

Andrey
-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1553 bytes --]

On Thursday 14 September 2006 11:49, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> > Not sure about the links from the overlays.g.o, gentooscience.org was
> > created before the overlays think had even been discussed as a solution
> > to a problem. It is advertised here, and on the IRC channel but it would
> > be good to get it more widely advertised.
>
> Yes. Now there is a link path from www.gentoo.org to overlays.gentoo.org,
> and there is no link path from www.gentoo.org to gentooscience.org. And
> this means that the whole world knows about the overlays at
> overlays.gentoo.org, and nobody (except a few developers subscribed to
> this list) knows about gentooscience.org.
>
> By the way, overlays.gentooscience.org uses trac and works stable.
>
I am well aware of that overlays uses trac too. I was just stating an opinion 
on the software. As far as I can tell gentooscience.org is running stable and 
I can no longer reproduce any error.

The original error was due to mod_python needing to be rebuilt after an apache 
upgrade. Not sure why it didn't happen every time but without being informed 
about something I can't fix it...

The original intent of the overlay was to create it for use by developers and 
interested users, i.e. people that might subscribe to lists like this. May be 
that intent has shifted over time and so promotion is now more important but 
it was announced in several places at the time. It should run stable and I 
will do what I can to fix it if not. 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 524 bytes --]

Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> Not sure about the links from the overlays.g.o, gentooscience.org was created 
> before the overlays think had even been discussed as a solution to a problem. 
> It is advertised here, and on the IRC channel but it would be good to get it 
> more widely advertised. 

Pretty sure they're not interested in linking to external overlays. If
you want a link, and to save some time on maintenance and future
breakage, it might be easier to just migrate to their hosting.

Thanks,
Donnie


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Andrey G. Grozin]

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> > Not sure about the links from the overlays.g.o, gentooscience.org was created 
> > before the overlays think had even been discussed as a solution to a problem. 
> > It is advertised here, and on the IRC channel but it would be good to get it 
> > more widely advertised. 
> Pretty sure they're not interested in linking to external overlays. If
> you want a link, and to save some time on maintenance and future
> breakage, it might be easier to just migrate to their hosting.
I think this is an excellent idea. First-class inofficial overlays live at 
overlays.gentoo.org; we want the same status, we don't want to be second- 
(or third-) class.

Andrey
-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Sebastien Fabbro]

If overlays.g.o has better support, I back up Donnie's suggestion.

I cannot close the "Trac tickets" on the gentooscience overlay of the 
ebuilds I commit and I don't receive any notification a new ticket 
arrived. To track an ebuild, I usually file a bug on bugs.g.o, but it is 
not very practical to keep trac of an ebuild on two sites.
Many of the gentooscience tickets could be closed. Other than a svn 
repository, it does not do much else.

I guess the other sci herd testers have the same problems.

Sebastien

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Pretty sure they're not interested in linking to external overlays. If
> you want a link, and to save some time on maintenance and future
> breakage, it might be easier to just migrate to their hosting.
> 
> Thanks,
> Donnie
> 

-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2191 bytes --]

On Friday 15 September 2006 05:22, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> > Not sure about the links from the overlays.g.o, gentooscience.org was
> > created before the overlays think had even been discussed as a solution
> > to a problem. It is advertised here, and on the IRC channel but it would
> > be good to get it more widely advertised.
>
> Pretty sure they're not interested in linking to external overlays. If
> you want a link, and to save some time on maintenance and future
> breakage, it might be easier to just migrate to their hosting.
>
Like I said I set this up before overlays was available. I don't mind 
performing the maintenance but if most would rather migrate then that is fine 
with me too. I don't think there is anything special about overlays.g.o but 
my time is becoming more limited anyway and so handing off administration 
would not be a bad thing.

I personally think trac adds little more than a source browser - the ticket 
system needs work to be more useful and I haven't had time to work out the 
niggles. It gets spammed regularly too. I notice they have turned it off 
(which is what I was thinking of doing).

To quote from their site 'You don't have to have an overlay at all, and if you 
do have one, you are absolutely free to host your own overlay somewhere else. 
You don't have to host an overlay on o.g.o for it to be 
considered "official".' If the general opinion is to move then please let me 
know and I will contact someone from the project about migrating the overlay.

I really dislike how the authentication is not encrypted (or is it now?), but 
that may be just me and my opinions/levels of paranoia on the whole thing... 
It appears you don't have to go on o.g.o to be "official" whatever that means 
according to their own web page - see the bottom of 
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/overlays/devguide.xml

Give me opinions guys. I am not going to hold the overlay hostage but I would 
rather it was moved for a real reason rather than this being the latest new 
shiny thing... I can place a full back up of the SVN repo online somewhere if 
you want to move it or have a copy...

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1592 bytes --]

On Friday 15 September 2006 08:50, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> > > Not sure about the links from the overlays.g.o, gentooscience.org was
> > > created before the overlays think had even been discussed as a solution
> > > to a problem. It is advertised here, and on the IRC channel but it
> > > would be good to get it more widely advertised.
> >
> > Pretty sure they're not interested in linking to external overlays. If
> > you want a link, and to save some time on maintenance and future
> > breakage, it might be easier to just migrate to their hosting.
>
> I think this is an excellent idea. First-class inofficial overlays live at
> overlays.gentoo.org; we want the same status, we don't want to be second-
> (or third-) class.

I think this statement is incorrect about first or second class overlays. 
According to their own FAQs that is not the case. My own personal belief says 
it certainly is not that case. To make a more reasoned case you have to ask 
what the actual benefits of a move might be, i.e. bigger admin team, more 
widely used/tested, shiny gentoo.org domain ending...

But like I said in my last response if the overall opinion is to move I will 
make the subversion repo backup available for migration of the overlay. I set 
it up as a service for the Gentoo scientific community before any of this was 
available as we were sick of waiting for it to appear... Now it has may be 
the overlay would be better there. I am not sure - I doubt it would hurt 
though...

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Andrey G. Grozin]

On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> On Friday 15 September 2006 08:50, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > > Pretty sure they're not interested in linking to external overlays. If
> > > you want a link, and to save some time on maintenance and future
> > > breakage, it might be easier to just migrate to their hosting.
> > I think this is an excellent idea. First-class inofficial overlays live at
> > overlays.gentoo.org; we want the same status, we don't want to be second-
> > (or third-) class.
> 
> I think this statement is incorrect about first or second class overlays. 
> According to their own FAQs that is not the case. My own personal belief says 
> it certainly is not that case. To make a more reasoned case you have to ask 
> what the actual benefits of a move might be, i.e. bigger admin team, more 
> widely used/tested, shiny gentoo.org domain ending...
> 
> But like I said in my last response if the overall opinion is to move I will 
> make the subversion repo backup available for migration of the overlay. I set 
> it up as a service for the Gentoo scientific community before any of this was 
> available as we were sick of waiting for it to appear... Now it has may be 
> the overlay would be better there. I am not sure - I doubt it would hurt 
> though...
Suppose I am a Gentoo user, and I want to try some new package (or a 
bleeding-edge version) which is not in the main tree. I search the Gentoo 
website for links to some experimental overlays (something like rpmforge 
and freshrpms in the RedHat world). And aha! I find overlays.gentoo.org 
(and nothing else). If the package I want is in one of the overlays there, 
I am happy. If not, I am stuck.

In other words, overlays.gentoo.org lives on the Gentoo continent; 
gentooscience.org is an island in the middle of nowhere.

Andrey
-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3565 bytes --]

Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> On Saturday 16 September 2006 09:51, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
>>> On Friday 15 September 2006 08:50, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>>>>> Pretty sure they're not interested in linking to external overlays.
>>>>> If you want a link, and to save some time on maintenance and future
>>>>> breakage, it might be easier to just migrate to their hosting.
>>>> I think this is an excellent idea. First-class inofficial overlays live
>>>> at overlays.gentoo.org; we want the same status, we don't want to be
>>>> second- (or third-) class.
>>> I think this statement is incorrect about first or second class overlays.
>>> According to their own FAQs that is not the case. My own personal belief
>>> says it certainly is not that case. To make a more reasoned case you have
>>> to ask what the actual benefits of a move might be, i.e. bigger admin
>>> team, more widely used/tested, shiny gentoo.org domain ending...
>>>
>>> But like I said in my last response if the overall opinion is to move I
>>> will make the subversion repo backup available for migration of the
>>> overlay. I set it up as a service for the Gentoo scientific community
>>> before any of this was available as we were sick of waiting for it to
>>> appear... Now it has may be the overlay would be better there. I am not
>>> sure - I doubt it would hurt though...
>> Suppose I am a Gentoo user, and I want to try some new package (or a
>> bleeding-edge version) which is not in the main tree. I search the Gentoo
>> website for links to some experimental overlays (something like rpmforge
>> and freshrpms in the RedHat world). And aha! I find overlays.gentoo.org
>> (and nothing else). If the package I want is in one of the overlays there,
>> I am happy. If not, I am stuck.
>>
>> In other words, overlays.gentoo.org lives on the Gentoo continent;
>> gentooscience.org is an island in the middle of nowhere.
> 
> May be that is where our opinions of what the overlay is for are very 
> different. I never set the overlay up with general users in mind, and that 
> wasn't what we discussed when we were thinking about why we needed an 
> overlay.
> 
> In my opinion the overlay is there for interested users wishing to take a 
> bigger role in development, using experimental ebuilds and helping to improve 
> them until they are ready to go into the tree. As such I was never interested 
> in trying to get the attention of some user searching for a particular ebuild. 
> All ebuilds which are suitable should be moved into the main tree 
> anyway and so the user will find it there...
> 
> I never tried to keep the overlay secret, but why should users have to 
> set up a myriad of overlays if they just want to run a system? May be you 
> would be better off becoming a developer and adding stuff to the tree? If we 
> follow a trend of keeping more and more stuff in various overlays then Gentoo 
> just becomes more of a pain to run IMHO.

There's a middle ground, where current developers don't want to maintain
a package, but the non-developer with commit access to an overlay
doesn't want to commit the time to become a developer. This is where
things end up staying in overlays even though they're theoretically
ready for the tree. This is why it's useful for users to be able to find
overlays.

Layman has made it trivially easy to add overlays already, so it's
really much of a pain at all.

Thanks,
Donnie


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3825 bytes --]

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
>> On Saturday 16 September 2006 09:51, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
>>> On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
>>>> On Friday 15 September 2006 08:50, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>>>>>> Pretty sure they're not interested in linking to external overlays.
>>>>>> If you want a link, and to save some time on maintenance and future
>>>>>> breakage, it might be easier to just migrate to their hosting.
>>>>> I think this is an excellent idea. First-class inofficial overlays live
>>>>> at overlays.gentoo.org; we want the same status, we don't want to be
>>>>> second- (or third-) class.
>>>> I think this statement is incorrect about first or second class overlays.
>>>> According to their own FAQs that is not the case. My own personal belief
>>>> says it certainly is not that case. To make a more reasoned case you have
>>>> to ask what the actual benefits of a move might be, i.e. bigger admin
>>>> team, more widely used/tested, shiny gentoo.org domain ending...
>>>>
>>>> But like I said in my last response if the overall opinion is to move I
>>>> will make the subversion repo backup available for migration of the
>>>> overlay. I set it up as a service for the Gentoo scientific community
>>>> before any of this was available as we were sick of waiting for it to
>>>> appear... Now it has may be the overlay would be better there. I am not
>>>> sure - I doubt it would hurt though...
>>> Suppose I am a Gentoo user, and I want to try some new package (or a
>>> bleeding-edge version) which is not in the main tree. I search the Gentoo
>>> website for links to some experimental overlays (something like rpmforge
>>> and freshrpms in the RedHat world). And aha! I find overlays.gentoo.org
>>> (and nothing else). If the package I want is in one of the overlays there,
>>> I am happy. If not, I am stuck.
>>>
>>> In other words, overlays.gentoo.org lives on the Gentoo continent;
>>> gentooscience.org is an island in the middle of nowhere.
>> May be that is where our opinions of what the overlay is for are very 
>> different. I never set the overlay up with general users in mind, and that 
>> wasn't what we discussed when we were thinking about why we needed an 
>> overlay.
>>
>> In my opinion the overlay is there for interested users wishing to take a 
>> bigger role in development, using experimental ebuilds and helping to improve 
>> them until they are ready to go into the tree. As such I was never interested 
>> in trying to get the attention of some user searching for a particular ebuild. 
>> All ebuilds which are suitable should be moved into the main tree 
>> anyway and so the user will find it there...
>>
>> I never tried to keep the overlay secret, but why should users have to 
>> set up a myriad of overlays if they just want to run a system? May be you 
>> would be better off becoming a developer and adding stuff to the tree? If we 
>> follow a trend of keeping more and more stuff in various overlays then Gentoo 
>> just becomes more of a pain to run IMHO.
> 
> There's a middle ground, where current developers don't want to maintain
> a package, but the non-developer with commit access to an overlay
> doesn't want to commit the time to become a developer. This is where
> things end up staying in overlays even though they're theoretically
> ready for the tree. This is why it's useful for users to be able to find
> overlays.
> 
> Layman has made it trivially easy to add overlays already, so it's
> really much of a pain at all.

*not* much of a pain. Sorry it's late =)

Also, there's another middle ground where things are good enough to be
usable but not good enough to go into the main tree.

Thanks,
Donnie


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3745 bytes --]

On Saturday 16 September 2006 09:51, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> > On Friday 15 September 2006 08:50, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
> > > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > > > Pretty sure they're not interested in linking to external overlays.
> > > > If you want a link, and to save some time on maintenance and future
> > > > breakage, it might be easier to just migrate to their hosting.
> > >
> > > I think this is an excellent idea. First-class inofficial overlays live
> > > at overlays.gentoo.org; we want the same status, we don't want to be
> > > second- (or third-) class.
> >
> > I think this statement is incorrect about first or second class overlays.
> > According to their own FAQs that is not the case. My own personal belief
> > says it certainly is not that case. To make a more reasoned case you have
> > to ask what the actual benefits of a move might be, i.e. bigger admin
> > team, more widely used/tested, shiny gentoo.org domain ending...
> >
> > But like I said in my last response if the overall opinion is to move I
> > will make the subversion repo backup available for migration of the
> > overlay. I set it up as a service for the Gentoo scientific community
> > before any of this was available as we were sick of waiting for it to
> > appear... Now it has may be the overlay would be better there. I am not
> > sure - I doubt it would hurt though...
>
> Suppose I am a Gentoo user, and I want to try some new package (or a
> bleeding-edge version) which is not in the main tree. I search the Gentoo
> website for links to some experimental overlays (something like rpmforge
> and freshrpms in the RedHat world). And aha! I find overlays.gentoo.org
> (and nothing else). If the package I want is in one of the overlays there,
> I am happy. If not, I am stuck.
>
> In other words, overlays.gentoo.org lives on the Gentoo continent;
> gentooscience.org is an island in the middle of nowhere.

May be that is where our opinions of what the overlay is for are very 
different. I never set the overlay up with general users in mind, and that 
wasn't what we discussed when we were thinking about why we needed an 
overlay.

In my opinion the overlay is there for interested users wishing to take a 
bigger role in development, using experimental ebuilds and helping to improve 
them until they are ready to go into the tree. As such I was never interested 
in trying to get the attention of some user searching for a particular ebuild. 
All ebuilds which are suitable should be moved into the main tree 
anyway and so the user will find it there...

I never tried to keep the overlay secret, but why should users have to 
set up a myriad of overlays if they just want to run a system? May be you 
would be better off becoming a developer and adding stuff to the tree? If we 
follow a trend of keeping more and more stuff in various overlays then Gentoo 
just becomes more of a pain to run IMHO.

I am hoping to get more proactive in moving suitable ebuilds from the overlay 
to the main tree in the near future. I will also be encouraging other devs to 
do the same if they are not already. So the overlay will get smaller as stuff 
is moved. Hopefully some of our active herd testers will go on to become 
developers and maintain some of this stuff themselves too.

May be the aims of the overlay should be more clearly defined through debate 
and documented on the overlay site. I am away for the week starting in about 
one hour anyway... I will catch up on discussions when I get back. It would 
be good to hear what more people think about this subject - may be I am on my 
own with my opinions?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Jan Marten Simons]

Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> I never tried to keep the overlay secret, but why should users have to 
> set up a myriad of overlays if they just want to run a system? May be you 
> would be better off becoming a developer and adding stuff to the tree? If we 
> follow a trend of keeping more and more stuff in various overlays then Gentoo 
> just becomes more of a pain to run IMHO.
>
> I am hoping to get more proactive in moving suitable ebuilds from the overlay 
> to the main tree in the near future. I will also be encouraging other devs to 
> do the same if they are not already. So the overlay will get smaller as stuff 
> is moved. Hopefully some of our active herd testers will go on to become 
> developers and maintain some of this stuff themselves too.
>
> May be the aims of the overlay should be more clearly defined through debate 
> and documented on the overlay site. I am away for the week starting in about 
> one hour anyway... I will catch up on discussions when I get back. It would 
> be good to hear what more people think about this subject - may be I am on my 
> own with my opinions?
>   

I think it would be a good thing if some interested users do some 
additionally testing of "in work" ebuilds, so that the applications are 
tested on a wider range of hardware and configurations. As a move to 
o.g.o would reduce maintainance as well, I'm in favour of this. 
gentooscience.org could then redirect there.


Jan

-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-science] website python error

[Andrey G. Grozin]

Hello *,

I am returning to the original subject of this thread :-)
This is what I got now when I pressed the "Browse source" button:

----------------------------------------------------------------
Oops...
Trac detected an internal error:

argument number 0: a 'apr_pool_t *' is expected, 
'instance(<libsvn.core.GenericSWIGWrapper instance at 0x35593bfbea70>)' is 
received

If you think this really should work and you can reproduce it. Then you 
should consider to report this problem to the Trac team.

Go to http://trac.edgewall.com/ and create a new ticket where you describe 
the problem, how to reproduce it. Don't forget to include the python 
traceback found below.

TracGuide ? The Trac User and Administration Guide
Python traceback

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/web/modpython_frontend.py", 
line 206, in handler
    dispatch_request(mpr.path_info, mpr, env)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/web/main.py", line 139, in 
dispatch_request
    dispatcher.dispatch(req)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/web/main.py", line 107, in 
dispatch
    resp = chosen_handler.process_request(req)
  File 
"/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/versioncontrol/web_ui/browser.py", 
line 78, in process_request
    repos = self.env.get_repository(req.authname)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/env.py", line 155, in 
get_repository
    from trac.versioncontrol.svn_fs import SubversionRepository
  File "/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/versioncontrol/svn_fs.py", 
line 25, in ?
    from svn import fs, repos, core, delta
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/svn/fs.py", line 19, in ?
    from libsvn.fs import *
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/libsvn/fs.py", line 29, in ?
    import core
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/libsvn/core.py", line 3057, in 
?
    svn_pool_create()
  File "/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/libsvn/core.py", line 1098, in 
svn_pool_create
    return apply(_core.svn_pool_create, args)
TypeError: argument number 0: a 'apr_pool_t *' is expected, 
'instance(<libsvn.core.GenericSWIGWrapper instance at 0x35593bfbea70>)' is 
received
------------------------------------------------------------

So, problems with the web site continue...

Andrey

-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list