Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:04 AM, John Regehr wrote: > Argh, thanks, sorry for the noise! > > John > > > On 4/7/16 2:02 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > >> On 4/7/16, John Regehr wrote: >> >>> What is the branch tag reported by fossil status? Perhaps the branch

Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

On 4/7/2016 5:02 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: On 4/7/16, John Regehr wrote: Is that expected that I will be silently moved between branches? Normally Fossil does not move between branches. Except, if you use the --latest option, it will move to the most latest descendent

Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

Argh, thanks, sorry for the noise! John On 4/7/16 2:02 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: On 4/7/16, John Regehr wrote: What is the branch tag reported by fossil status? Perhaps the branch you were on got renamed? It says this: tags: pager-get-noinit whereas I had previously

Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

On 4/7/16, John Regehr wrote: >> What is the branch tag reported by fossil status? Perhaps the branch you >> were on got renamed? > > It says this: > > tags: pager-get-noinit > > whereas I had previously been on the trunk. Is that expected that I > will be silently moved

Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

What is the branch tag reported by fossil status? Perhaps the branch you were on got renamed? It says this: tags: pager-get-noinit whereas I had previously been on the trunk. Is that expected that I will be silently moved between branches? Sorry if I'm asking dumb questions-- I'm really

Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 4:45 AM, Scott Robison wrote: > What is the branch tag reported by fossil status? Perhaps the branch you > were on got renamed? > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:43 AM, John Regehr wrote: > >> Hi Andy, >> >> I'm returning to this

Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

What is the branch tag reported by fossil status? Perhaps the branch you were on got renamed? On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:43 AM, John Regehr wrote: > Hi Andy, > > I'm returning to this topic because I again have a repo that got "stuck". > > Please see the interaction with

Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

Hi Andy, I'm returning to this topic because I again have a repo that got "stuck". Please see the interaction with fossil below. I ran "fossil update --latest" and it received 53 artifacts, but didn't end up updating and of my local files. And in fact, a diff between a fresh checkout of

Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

Thus said John Regehr on Tue, 08 Mar 2016 10:18:15 +0100: > This usually works, but every couple of weeks my local repository gets > somehow stuck in a state where the remote changes appear to be pulled > from the server, but then they are not applied to my local sources. > This has happened

Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

> Le 8 mars 2016 à 05:23, Stephan Beal a écrit : > >> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 10:18 AM, John Regehr wrote: >> I have an extremely simply use case for fossil: I'm tracking the latest >> sqlite sources but I have some modifications in my local

Re: [fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 10:18 AM, John Regehr wrote: > I have an extremely simply use case for fossil: I'm tracking the latest > sqlite sources but I have some modifications in my local repository. Every > few days I run "fossil update --latest". This usually works, but every

[fossil-users] fossil update --latest not working

I have an extremely simply use case for fossil: I'm tracking the latest sqlite sources but I have some modifications in my local repository. Every few days I run "fossil update --latest". This usually works, but every couple of weeks my local repository gets somehow stuck in a state where the