Re: [fossil-users] Gentoo: SQLITE_WARNING... best approach for Portage
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.orgwrote: Thus said John L. Poole on Tue, 19 Nov 2013 05:12:08 -0800: The reason I'm writing to this list is to inquire if there will be a new release coming shortly or if I should try to create an ebuild that incorporates the patch that fixes this problem? I think it would be safest just to wait for the next release. Here are some issues you'll need to consider if you go the patch route: ... 3) To avoid 2, you can merge/commit the patch into a private branch in a cloned copy of the fossil repository. Then extract the patch from there as a diff from the official released version and your branch. Good morning! If the patch is relatively small, please just paste it to the list (don't attach it - attachments get stripped). i don't see the prior mail explaining the problem - maybe it already contains the patch? I don't know when the next official release will be, but this will give you an idea of the historical trend: Nobody knows - historically we release them when the changelog gets unusually long or when something truly critical was fixed. -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do. -- Bigby Wolf ___ 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] Gentoo: SQLITE_WARNING... best approach for Portage
Thus said Stephan Beal on Wed, 20 Nov 2013 10:24:02 +0100: If the patch is relatively small, please just paste it to the list (don't attach it - attachments get stripped). i don't see the prior mail explaining the problem - maybe it already contains the patch? The patch is already in Fossil: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/e65162b4ad He is looking for the best way to get this patch applied against version-1.27 and integrated into Gentoo's Portage so it gets included with their builds. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000528cd0ed ___ 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] Gentoo: SQLITE_WARNING... best approach for Portage
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.orgwrote: Thus said Stephan Beal on Wed, 20 Nov 2013 10:24:02 +0100: If the patch is relatively small, please just paste it to the list (don't attach it - attachments get stripped). i don't see the prior mail explaining the problem - maybe it already contains the patch? The patch is already in Fossil: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/e65162b4ad Ah, i've missed so much traffic/context recently :(. IIRC, Richard tweaked that fix at some point: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/vdiff?from=e65162b4ad664ae37to=aef638b61003fcf2sbs=1 search that for main.c and you'll see that line 1185 from e65162 was removed later on. i.e. the patch for Gentoo should probably look a little bit different now. As for how best to feed that into their build process... no idea :/. -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do. -- Bigby Wolf ___ 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] Gentoo: SQLITE_WARNING... best approach for Portage
On 20 Nov 2013 16:40, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: Thus said Stephan Beal on Wed, 20 Nov 2013 10:24:02 +0100: If the patch is relatively small, please just paste it to the list (don't attach it - attachments get stripped). i don't see the prior mail explaining the problem - maybe it already contains the patch? The patch is already in Fossil: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/e65162b4ad Ah, i've missed so much traffic/context recently :(. IIRC, Richard tweaked that fix at some point: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/vdiff?from=e65162b4ad664ae37to=aef638b61003fcf2sbs=1 search that for main.c and you'll see that line 1185 from e65162 was removed later on. i.e. the patch for Gentoo should probably look a little bit different now. As for how best to feed that into their build process... no idea :/. -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do. -- Bigby Wolf ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users Considering fossil releases are relatively rare and fossil trunk is generally in a good state, I would suggest picking the current trunk head and update the version on a regular basis if fixes that are of interest for Gentoo users are merged with trunk. ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] Gentoo: SQLITE_WARNING... best approach for Portage
On Gentoo Linux, I created a custom ebuild to 2013-09-11 11:43:49, 2013094349, the version offered at http://www.fossil-scm.org/download.html. An ebuild is basically a recipe or install script for a package manager to download and install a project software. The package management system on Gentoo is called Portage and this is one of the main reasons I use Gentoo -- the convenience Portage provides making installing open source projects a breeze. Currently Gentoo's official Portage tree offers version 20130216000435 of Fossil at http://packages.gentoo.org/package/dev-vcs/fossil. I decided to create a custom ebuild as I wanted to get the latest and greatest release of fossil To create a custom ebuild in Gentoo, one can take an existing ebuild file and simply change its version and then see if it installs. http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=3chap=5#doc_chap2 I tried using the 20130216000435 release as a template for the and had to remove a reference markdown. Otherwise, I successfully installed fossil 2013094349 using my custom ebuild. Then when I went to follow the Quick Start at http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/quickstart.wiki I ran into the SQLITE_WARNING: file renamed while opening: /root/[project name] This SQLITE_WARNING issue was recently vetted on this mail list http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg13410.html. Gentoo offers the ability to follow a trunk line of code development on a project, but that feature is only for the not-so-feint of heart and discourage for obvious reasons. The better practice is to target a project's release, such as Fossil's 2013-09-11 11:43:49 and thereby reaching a broader audience. Portage can incorporate patches to a particular release. The reason I'm writing to this list is to inquire if there will be a new release coming shortly or if I should try to create an ebuild that incorporates the patch that fixes this problem? I'd like to see Gentoo's Portage contain the current release of Fossil. I do not want to submit my ebuild to Gentoo until I know what I have created works. I also don't want to spend the time if a new release is shortly around the corner, e.g. within several weeks. If a new release is not imminent, it would be a tremendous help if someone were to provide me a patch file for your 2013-09-11 11:43:49 release. I confess I'm not experienced in applying patches to Gentoo ebuilds, but I'm willing to try. John ___ 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] Gentoo: SQLITE_WARNING... best approach for Portage
Thus said John L. Poole on Tue, 19 Nov 2013 05:12:08 -0800: The reason I'm writing to this list is to inquire if there will be a new release coming shortly or if I should try to create an ebuild that incorporates the patch that fixes this problem? I think it would be safest just to wait for the next release. Here are some issues you'll need to consider if you go the patch route: 1) Do you patch just this one bug fix? 2) If you patch the zip archive of the source the version identifier reported by your patched version and the non-patched will report the same. Making bug reporting difficult. 3) To avoid 2, you can merge/commit the patch into a private branch in a cloned copy of the fossil repository. Then extract the patch from there as a diff from the official released version and your branch. I don't know when the next official release will be, but this will give you an idea of the historical trend: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/timeline?t=release Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000528c4bdd ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
