Recursive Get of VSSVersion and VSSItem Doesn’t Work in VSS 6.0d


By default, the Get method does not work recursively in Visual SourceSafe 6.0d. Accompanying error message: “Version not found“.  You can obtain a hotfix from Microsoft’s hardest working employees in Product Support Services.  For details, see 837417.

Comments (14)

  1. O says:

    Could we PLEASE get a publicly available download location for this fix? I’m not about to risk calling PSS, give them a credit card number, explain to them that yes I’ve tried rebooting, yes I’ve got the right version installed, yes I really need to download that exact patch, and then trust them to not charge me. Besides, I don’t like waiting on hold for longer than it takes me to download the fix.

    I’ve run into this very problem using recursive get in an NAnt task with VSS 6.0d, and wrote my own manually recursive get for a labeled version. I’d love to have this, but don’t want to jump through hoops to get it.

  2. I second that motion. Why is it that recently Microsoft stopped making fixes available for download?

  3. Zulu says:

    Hi,

    Sorry to write this here..but i couldn’t find

    the place where i could create a post…

    It would be great help if you could help me..

    I have a very large VSS database, i took the complete archival of it on the 10th Dec 2003…now i want to take an archival of the database but an incremental one..i.e. from the 10th Dec 2003 till this date..

    I used the option of Archive this version and older and gave the Date as D12/10/2003…but this archives till 10th Dec 2003..and not onwards 10th dec 2003…Is there any way do to an incremental archive or do i have to do a complete archive again…

    Thanks in advance

    Zulu

  4. Regarding the hotfix, my man in Microsoft Product Support Services (PSS) says, "The customer must go through PSS to obtain the hotfix. We have no way of tracking who has the fix and who doesn’t unless they come through official channels. Please tell this customer that they don’t need to give a credit card number to obtain the hotfix, nor will they have to ‘jump through any hoops’. All we need is the customer’s information and we send the hotfix." HTH.

  5. O says:

    "We have no way of tracking who has the fix and who doesn’t unless they come through official channels."

    Tell me again why this should be my problem? And why should it even be Microsoft’s concern?

    I still call "bogus" on the PSS call. I don’t have to call PSS for service packs or security patches on other products.

    Shouldn’t Microsoft want patches to be as widely available as possible? Calling PSS is NOT the solution. It sounds to me like PSS has a good thing going by being the man-in-the-middle, and they aren’t gonna give it up without a fight.

  6. James Sears says:

    We discovered the 6.0d recursive get was broke a few days after 6.0d was made available. We took the easy option and just backed off to 6.0c.

    Surely an example of lousy quality control at Microsoft? Breaking something, in the context of VSS, that is so important. After all, how can you do an automated build without such a function?

    And as for that KB article, that’s almost a complete waste of space. It doesn’t even mention ‘Version not found’ – the text that lets you recognise the bug.

  7. You’re right, this is a pretty fundamental break, especially if you call VSS during automated builds. Thanks for pointing out the thing about ‘Version not found’. I added it to the post to improve discoverability.

    Yo O,

    *I* want patches to be as widely available as possible and I know for a fact that my guy on the ground over in PSS wants you to have it with as little hastle as possible. But he’s part of a larger organization that has evolved rules and conventions for good reasons, I think. For hotfixes, which are not tested as thoroughly as full releases, service packs and security fixes, they just want to have your contact information available so that they issue a fix to a fix if an issue is discovered.

    Zulu,

    I’ll answer your question in more detail over at TekTip Forums. The short answer to your question is that Archive is not the optimal solution to your needs.

  8. Zulu says:

    Ok..i have posted the same question in Tek Tips also..will wait for your reply..

    this is the Id for my Post on Tek Tips

    http://www.tek-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?SQID=799303&SPID=722&page=1

    Thanks a Lot..

  9. P says:

    How should SP6 be installed so that it does not include VSS 6.0d ? I struck this and related problems when 6.0d came out and also had to revert to 6.0c (after wasting time on tests & Analyze & internet searches).

    It seems that Microsoft did not have time to test recursive gets before the 6.0d release last year. This problem was known by a VSS Program Manager at least since the middle of last year. They did not have time to fix it during the lengthy SP6 beta testing. They did not have time to document the problem for SP6. Now they have not had time to test the PSS hotfix thoroughly. I cannot help but wonder whether a KB article (let alone the hotfix) would have surfaced at all if Whidbey had not been delayed …

    While I do appreciate Korby’s ongoing efforts on behalf of VSS users, Microsoft does not seem to take VSS seriously in terms of testing, fixes, enhancements, or new features.

    It’s time for one of us to start talking to other source-control vendors again.

  10. chris says:

    i have this problem also,now it’ll be solved with my friend’s help.now i can suppory u vss 6.0d for .net if u want.just email me this address:jianbomiao@yahoo.com.cn

  11. After years of automating Visual SourceSafe(VSS), I am beginning to post and organize all my knowledge

Skip to main content