Thanks for darcs, it's an excellent tool.

I am getting an error from 'darcs trackdown', so at the end of this 
message I have described
the command that caused it.  If there is any other information you would 
like about this problem,
please let me know.

(By accident, I may have sent a draft version of this message about 10 
minutes ago, it
describes this same error.)

Thanks again,
Jonathan Kelley
jkelley@visualhash.com

---

Produced this output on stdout:
> Tracking down command:
> cd test; ruby suites.rb
> [deleted output of first run of test command]
>
> Tracking down command:
> cd test; ruby suites.rb
> Trying without the patch:
> Thu Nov  9 15:24:03 PST 2006  jkelley@visualhash.com
>   * 2006-11-09 15:24:03 -  [deleted patch description]
> [deleted output of second test command]
And the following output to stderr:
> Fail: bug in darcs!
> fromJust error at TrackDown.lhs:89 compiled 13:59:22 Feb 12 2005
> Please report this to bugs@darcs.net,
> If possible include the output of 'darcs --exact-version'.
'darcs --exact-version' gives this:
> darcs compiled on Jul 18 2006, at 15:08:59
> # configured Tue Jul 18 15:03:25 JST 2006
> ./configure --with-static-libs
>
> Context:
>
> [TAG 1.0.8
> Tommy Pettersson <ptp@lysator.liu.se>**20060616160213]
uname -a
> Linux ofb.net 2.6.11-ofb1 #1 SMP Sun Mar 20 12:52:45 EST 2005 i686 
> GNU/Linux

-Jonathan Kelley
jkelley@visualhash.com

Is this a partial repository?

If it is, then the bug is simply a misleading error message, fixed in the
current unstable tree.

Hi Johnathan,

If you have a moment, could you please confirm if (1) this was a partial
repository and (2) if you can reproduce this with a later version of darcs (the
current unstable branch would be fine, stable or 1.0.9 might also be informative).

Thanks!

Considering this bug "presumed-dead", after no further follow-up from the
reporter in 2006.