This sounds scary, so I'm marking it as urgent (happens with latest darcs
unstable > 2.0.0pre3) on Ubuntu Linux Gutsy

% darcs get http://mark.stosberg.com/darcs_hive/darcs_speed_test
% darcs what -s
rmfile ./darcs0696OB-new
rmfile ./darcsIWCPDL-new
rmfile ./darcsJ4efzl-new
rmfile ./darcsVxJosv-new
rmfile ./darcsllv7Ib-new
rmfile ./darcsoOK5q5-new

Following up on that:

$ darcs check
Looks like we have a difference...
Nothing

Inconsistent repository!
$ darcs repair
Fixing pristine tree...
$ darcs what -s
No changes!

When I'm home again I can convert that repo to darcs-2, and see if the issue is
solved that way. 

For reference, the repo being pulled shows no un-recorded changes on the server. 

  Mark

On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 09:01:53AM -0000, Eric Kow wrote:
> This sounds scary, so I'm marking it as urgent (happens with latest darcs
> unstable > 2.0.0pre3) on Ubuntu Linux Gutsy
> 
> % darcs get http://mark.stosberg.com/darcs_hive/darcs_speed_test
> % darcs what -s
> rmfile ./darcs0696OB-new
> rmfile ./darcsIWCPDL-new
> rmfile ./darcsJ4efzl-new
> rmfile ./darcsVxJosv-new
> rmfile ./darcsllv7Ib-new
> rmfile ./darcsoOK5q5-new

Yes, that is scary.  It's a result of the new speculative-downloading code,
which evidently fails to clean up files in the pristine cache!

This won't affect hashed formats, but it's still an urgent bug.
-- 
David Roundy
Department of Physics
Oregon State University

I'm pushing a fix for this right now.  It turned out that we weren't cleaning up
after ourselves when downloads failed (e.g. when grabbing a non-existant
_darcs/format).