New submission from Edwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The current unstable darcs sends -q to ssh when it invokes it, which Putty's
plink doesn't understand. The patch that added it (Run ssh/scp/sftp quietly)
says in the comment that it's for Putty, though, so I must be missing something.
I have what
Or maybe this ps manual moving thing is a bad idea all together,
and we should roll it back??
Eh, I think it's ok :-)
--
Eric Kow http://www.loria.fr/~kow
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9 Merci de corriger mon français.
pgp5EbtgrSep1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 13:48:48 +0100, Eric Y. Kow wrote:
Or maybe this ps manual moving thing is a bad idea all together,
and we should roll it back??
Eh, I think it's ok :-)
Hmm, way to be ambiguous, Eric. Moving it to manual is good; at least,
there's where I keep looking for it.
--
New submission from Korusef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
In the attached log is the error when I was trying to repair commited
patches by splitting them.
The commands were:
darcs get A B
cd B;
darcs obliterate --patch='';
darcs pull one patch
darcs unrecord the pulled patch
#some changes to the file
I can confirm this. It happens on every windows machine in a project I'm
in. It appears harmless but the warning is unsettling to new users.
Magnus Jonsson
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Edwin wrote:
New submission from Edwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The current unstable darcs sends -q to ssh when it
Wed Nov 8 18:51:22 CET 2006 Tommy Pettersson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* really dump generated darcs.ps in subdir manual/
Now with working makefile!
New patches:
[really dump generated darcs.ps in subdir manual/
Tommy Pettersson [EMAIL PROTECTED]**20061108175122
Now with working makefile!
]
{
New submission from Zooko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Consider the following two calls (cut-and-pasted from my terminal).
How can the presence of that final l make the pattern invalid?
darcs v1.0.8.
Regards,
Zooko
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/trees/trunk$ darcs diff -u --match name \dbutil: convert
New submission from Eric Kow [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Darcs really ought to know the difference between a patch that has been
explicitly requested, and one that it has selected because of a depedency.
Doing so would allow us to tell the user (for example) that we are pushing a
patch because we depend
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 09:41:19PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is a simple test that fails (invalid pending) with current
darcs-unstable. I have tracked down the bug to the patch:
| Sun Sep 17 23:41:36 CEST 2006 David Roundy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|* clean up unrevert and pending
