[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: "Our directory information is no longer up-to-date enough to build circuits." problem logged

     On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 07:32:11 -0500 Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 12:57:33AM -0600, Scott Bennett wrote:
>>      This problem has now recurred twice for me with  The first
>> time I had forgotten to set the log level to "info", so I didn't get the
>> information that Nick wanted.  This time, though, I got it.  If Nick or Roger
>> will let me know a) how much of the log before the first problem message
>> appeared they would like to see and how much after and b) where to send it, I
>> can send that much of the log as a gzip-ped attachment.
>Hi Scott,
>I encountered this issue once with, and it wasn't
>immediately apparent what the problem was. Since then we've fixed a
>variety of things, including providing more details in the logs about
>*why* we don't feel we've got enough dir info.

     Oh, good.  Glad to know that.
>So if you could upgrade to svn trunk and see if it recurs there, that
>would be great. (And if it does recur, hopefully it will provide a better
>hint. :) (If upgrading to svn is too much of a hassle, I'm hoping to
>get the snapshot out sometime this week.)
     I don't have subversion installed and have never used it, so I think
I'll wait for the next snapshot.  Will "info" still be the log level needed
to get the information you and Nick want?  It's awfully verbose, so if the
new logging stuff you've added is tied to the message about an out-of-date
directory, could it maybe be issued at the "notice" level?

                                  Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
* Internet:       bennett at cs.niu.edu                              *
* "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good  *
* objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
* -- a standing army."                                               *
*    -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790         *