[fossil-users] Place to post patches?
Hello Is there a good place for posting fossil patches? There are a few which I posted here a while ago. One got some replies but the others are just archived in the ML and aging. There is no way to attach files (including patches) to bug reports so that they won't get forgotten. Thanks Michal ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Place to post patches?
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.czwrote: Hello Is there a good place for posting fossil patches? There are a few which I posted here a while ago. One got some replies but the others are just archived in the ML and aging. There is no way to attach files (including patches) to bug reports so that they won't get forgotten. I have just now turned on the permission for anonymous users to attach files to tickets and wiki pages. Thanks Michal ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- - D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Place to post patches?
On 17 June 2010 16:07, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Michal Suchanek hramr...@centrum.cz wrote: Hello Is there a good place for posting fossil patches? There are a few which I posted here a while ago. One got some replies but the others are just archived in the ML and aging. There is no way to attach files (including patches) to bug reports so that they won't get forgotten. I have just now turned on the permission for anonymous users to attach files to tickets and wiki pages. Added the patches to the respective tickets. Thanks Michal ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] Fossil plays badly with CGI not on port 80
I am in the process of getting fossil to run on my NAS devce, a DLink DNS-323. This beast is an ARM core running linux hosting a RAID made of two 1.5TB SATA drives, and with a cross toolchain in place under Ubuntu it was straightforward to get fossil to run there. However, the DNS-323 already has a web server on port 80 that provides all of its management UI, which is apparently not particularly extensible so it doesn't look easy to just add a CGI script to launch fossil with it. So I got thttpd built and running on the DNS-323, and set it up so that fossil can be run via a simple CGI naming a specific repository. Now my URLs look like http://192.168.1.150:8080/r.cgi/example/index assuming that r.cgi points to a directory containing example.fossil. However, when I fetch that page, all of the links it contains are missing the port number. It is also unstyled and missing its logo because those links too are missing the port number. Oddly, just using fossil server -R /mnt/HD_a2/repos to launch a server for my repo collection returns pages that do include the port number in the links. I don't want to do that in my NAS, however, because that won't permit me to host a directory of available repositories or any files outside of revision control. My investigation got stalled after finding that g.zBaseURL is really missing the port number. From inspection of set_base_url() in main.c, it isn't obvious how fossil server is able to get this right in the first place. Any thoughts? Ross Berteig r...@cheshireeng.com Cheshire Engineering Corp. http://www.CheshireEng.com/ +1 626 303 1602 +1 626 351 1590 FAX ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Fossil plays badly with CGI not on port 80
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Ross Berteig r...@cheshireeng.com wrote: So I got thttpd built and running on the DNS-323, and set it up so that fossil can be run via a simple CGI naming a specific repository. Now my URLs look like http://192.168.1.150:8080/r.cgi/example/index assuming that r.cgi points to a directory containing example.fossil. However, when I fetch that page, all of the links it contains are missing the port number. It is also unstyled and missing its logo because those links too are missing the port number. Any thoughts? I think this is a case of thttpd not setting up the HTTP_HOST environment variable correctly. When I run CGI using apache on port 8080, it works just fine: http://www.sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/fossil/test_env The cgi-bin I'm using above is the same apache that runs the mailman interface for SQLite and Fossil. As you can see from the test_env screen, the HTTP_HOST environment variable includes the port number. I'm guessing thttpd omits the port number. That would be a mistake on the part of thttpd, if I'm not badly mistaken. Fossil expects to find the TCP port number on the end of the HTTP_HOST environment variable and if it doesn't find it there, it assumes port 80. One of the backup webservers for Fossil is Hurricane Electric - a virtual host running apache, but on port 80 instead of 8080. See http://www.hwaci.com/cgi-bin/fossil/test_env As you can tell in this later link, HTTP_HOST omits the port number when the port number is 80. If you want a simple webserver for your DNS-323, consider running althttpd - the HTTP server used by www.fossil-scm.org and www.sqlite.org. The source code is a single file of C located here: http://www.sqlite.org/docsrc/artifact/d53e8146bf7977fea1df95e2e9e194ca55268ce0 Instructions on how to set it up and use it are contained in comments at the beginning of the source file. It supports multiple domains on the same IP address. I'm currently hosting 19 different domains on a single Linode 1024 (a 1/24th virtual slice of an actual server) including sqlite.org and fossil-scm.org. It easily handles 10GB of traffic and 280K hits per day with around 3% CPU utilization. And, althttpd correctly sets up the HTTP_HOST environment variable for CGI so that it works correctly with Fossil even on a non-standard port. -- - D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Why no action on ticket 6981de95b6 ?
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 9:39 PM, TJ Yang tjyang2...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, all Can someone with check-in privilege act on following ticket ? http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/tktview?name=6981de95b6 Richard, please grant me check-in privilege if you or others has no interest to correct these two errors. I will fix it myself and sync the changes to upstream. Unless you can come up with a patch that works on Linux and *BSD in addition to OpenSolaris, I will reject the patch. Note that *BSD does not have GnuMake so you cannot use any of the non-standard conditional macros found there. I'll also reject the patch if I think it unreasonably complicates the makefile. If you want to add a comment to the makefile saying that Solaris users should add the such-and-such options, or perhaps provides lines of the makefile that solaris user can uncomment, that would work. I have no capability to test on OpenSolaris, so I am unwilling to try such a patch myself. -- T.J. Yang ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- - D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
