On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 07:33:55AM +0200, Gour wrote:
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 18:21:06 -0600
Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
First . . . I misspoke. It was lighttpd that I was thinking of using,
not thttpd.
Second . . . Hiawatha doesn't meet my requirements for any project in
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:29:53 -0600
Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
My requirements tend to include one of two of the following:
1. Apache. Sometimes, for some reason, Apache is all that will do.
2. Lightweight and copyfree licensed.
Ahh, OK. Thanks.
Sincerely,
Gour
--
From
On Mon, 12 Aug 2013 18:15:37 -0600
Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
I'm actually leaning more toward thttpd now, anyway.
I'd also like to be able to use Fossil with e.g. FastCGI and wonder what
do you think about Hiawatha (http://www.hiawatha-webserver.org/) web
server which is
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
- FastCGI replaces read() and write() with its own drop-in replacements,
so all code has to be compiled using them. However, they got the signature
wrong on the write() routine. They take a non-const (void*) for the src
There are a number of FCGX_ routines, declared in fcgiapp.h, which may be
useful. I've used them in a project where recompiling all sources was not
possible (other code distributed as binary shared library).
Not sure how easy to integrate into Fossil, but as I recall Fossil has at least
some
On 13 August 2013 11:39, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
that (brain-dead) non-const first pointer to their fwrite() replacement
requires a cast in all fwrite()-using code. They macro-alias fwrite() to
FCGI_fwrite() (which is how they offer drop-in support).
Couldn't you add your own
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:53 PM, David Mason dma...@ryerson.ca wrote:
Couldn't you add your own macro that included the cast, to make it
more seamless?
Didn't think of that, actually. But the fact that fossil forks a new
process by itself for each request eliminates the benefit of fastcgi
On 13 August 2013 13:06, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
Didn't think of that, actually. But the fact that fossil forks a new process
by itself for each request eliminates the benefit of fastcgi (which is
primarily to reduce the forks by re-using the same app instance).
But those
on Sunday 11 August 2013 at 06:37, Chad Perrin wrote:
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 12:43:24PM +0200, Eduardo Morras wrote:
On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:07:41 -0600
Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
Dr. Hipp's series of suggestions have, of course, also been informative
for me, and while I do
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Natacha Porté nata...@instinctive.euwrote:
I'm afraid I'm missing something in this FastCGI discussion starting
from this post. What is the benefit of using FastCGI instead of
(existing) HTTP between nginx and a long-lived fossil process?
My only point was
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Natacha Porté nata...@instinctive.euwrote:
I'm afraid I'm missing something in this FastCGI discussion starting
from this post. What is the benefit of using FastCGI instead of
(existing) HTTP between nginx and a long-lived fossil process?
Or instead of HTTP
Sean Woods wrote:
[...]
Has anybody tried using fcgiwrap with Fossil in order to run it on Nginx?
(I haven't, but thought the pointer might be useful.)
I was using it for cowlark.com, but gave up in favour of running fossil
in inetd (and then having nginx proxy to the inetd session). I can't
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 2:06 PM, David Given d...@cowlark.com wrote:
Sean Woods wrote:
[...]
Has anybody tried using fcgiwrap with Fossil in order to run it on
Nginx? (I haven't, but thought the pointer might be useful.)
I was using it for cowlark.com, but gave up in favour of running
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 07:19:10AM +0200, Gour wrote:
On Mon, 12 Aug 2013 18:15:37 -0600
Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
I'm actually leaning more toward thttpd now, anyway.
I'd also like to be able to use Fossil with e.g. FastCGI and wonder what
do you think about Hiawatha
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 07:45:16PM -0600, Andy Bradford wrote:
Thus said Richard Hipp on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:45:31 -0400:
(1) Put all of the Fossil repositories you want to share in a single
directory, say /home/fossil/repos. Make sure all repository files
are named using the
Thus said Chad Perrin on Tue, 13 Aug 2013 18:39:21 -0600:
Everything was working great until I tried to use the following in the
authorized_keys file for the user account hosting the Fossil repos:
command=/usr/local/bin/fossil,no-X11-forwarding,no-agent-forwarding
ssh-rsa key
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 06:25:11PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.comwrote:
That wasn't terribly clear. FastCGI basically starts 1 instance of the
app and keeps
On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:07:41 -0600
Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
Dr. Hipp's series of suggestions have, of course, also been informative
for me, and while I do intend to expand capabilities to the point where
a separate webserver (probably nginx) is involved for some purposes as
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 12:43:24PM +0200, Eduardo Morras wrote:
On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:07:41 -0600
Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
Dr. Hipp's series of suggestions have, of course, also been informative
for me, and while I do intend to expand capabilities to the point where
a
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 11:40:34PM -0600, Andy Bradford wrote:
Thus said Chad Perrin on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:07:41 -0600:
Thank you. This looks like it will probably suit our needs quite well
for the time being. I'll investigate further on my own at this point,
though if any more
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
. . . but you can use fastcgi with nginx. Is that not good enough for
Fossil?
Fossil is not fastcgi-compatible. i tried to get it working a few years ago
but fastcgi requires that each execution of the app has a clean
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
Fossil is not fastcgi-compatible. i tried to get it working a few years
ago but fastcgi requires that each execution of the app has a clean
starting state, and fossil's app is built to work only for a single
execution.
Thus said Chad Perrin on Sun, 11 Aug 2013 06:38:45 -0600:
It should still log Fossil usernames though -- right? If so, that'll
do, at least for now.
Yes, it will do that.
Andy
--
TAI64 timestamp: 400052079daa
___
fossil-users mailing list
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.comwrote:
Fossil is not fastcgi-compatible. i tried to get it working a few years
ago but fastcgi requires that each execution of the app has a clean
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.comwrote:
That wasn't terribly clear. FastCGI basically starts 1 instance of the
app and keeps feeding it new data for each request. Fossil's structure does
On 8/11/13 2:07 AM, Chad Perrin wrote:
So . . . let's say I have a server (running FreeBSD, and I'll probably
be setting this up in a jail) and a router that can forward ports
(already has SSH forwarded to this server). For argument's sake, let's
say we're confined to only one port per
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
So . . . let's say I have a server (running FreeBSD, and I'll probably
be setting this up in a jail) and a router that can forward ports
(already has SSH forwarded to this server). For argument's sake, let's
say we're
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 08:45:31PM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
So . . . let's say I have a server (running FreeBSD, and I'll probably
be setting this up in a jail) and a router that can forward ports
(already has SSH
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 02:34:55AM +0200, Jan Danielsson wrote:
On 8/11/13 2:07 AM, Chad Perrin wrote:
So . . . let's say I have a server (running FreeBSD, and I'll probably
be setting this up in a jail) and a router that can forward ports
(already has SSH forwarded to this server). For
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 08:45:31PM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
So . . . let's say I have a server (running FreeBSD, and I'll probably
be setting
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 08:45:31PM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
So . . .
Thus said Chad Perrin on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 18:07:28 -0600:
What's the quick/easy way to get Fossil set up so a small team can
push/pull/sync multiple Fossil repositories on the server without
having shell accounts?
At the moment, this type of SSH integration isn't as flexible as
Thus said Richard Hipp on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:45:31 -0400:
(1) Put all of the Fossil repositories you want to share in a single
directory, say /home/fossil/repos. Make sure all repository files
are named using the *.fossil pattern. (Technically, you can scatter
the repositories out
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 07:20:11PM -0600, Andy Bradford wrote:
Thus said Chad Perrin on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 18:07:28 -0600:
What's the quick/easy way to get Fossil set up so a small team can
push/pull/sync multiple Fossil repositories on the server without
having shell accounts?
Thus said Richard Hipp on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:45:31 -0400:
* Users will have to log into each repository separately, by default.
However, if you put multiple repos together into a login group, then
logging into one repo logs them into all other repos of the login
group where they have
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 07:45:16PM -0600, Andy Bradford wrote:
Thus said Richard Hipp on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:45:31 -0400:
(1) Put all of the Fossil repositories you want to share in a single
directory, say /home/fossil/repos. Make sure all repository files
are named using the
Thus said Chad Perrin on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:03:58 -0600:
Maybe I can use it for some work done strictly within the network,
if there's no chance (more than usual) that it'll screw up the
repositories I'm using. If there is some increased chance of that, I
might set up some toy
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 08:45:31PM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote:
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
(1) Put all of the Fossil repositories you want to share in a single
directory, say /home/fossil/repos. Make sure all repository files are
named using the
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 08:16:15PM -0600, Andy Bradford wrote:
Thus said Chad Perrin on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:03:58 -0600:
Maybe I can use it for some work done strictly within the network,
if there's no chance (more than usual) that it'll screw up the
repositories I'm using.
Thus said Chad Perrin on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:21:46 -0600:
Why is naming them all foo.fossil important? Is that a hardcoded
extension expectation in the Fossil SCM sources that ensure the server
command will recognize the files -- and is it the only such extension
option for this purpose?
Thanks for the answers/confirmations. I hope I'm not being tedious
asking all these questions -- I just want to be absolutely sure I'm not
misunderstanding anything when the security of my server depends on some
of these answers (among other reasons for double-checking).
I've got things working
Thus said Chad Perrin on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 22:47:11 -0600:
Thanks for the answers/confirmations. I hope I'm not being tedious
asking all these questions -- I just want to be absolutely sure I'm
not misunderstanding anything when the security of my server depends
on some of these
Thus said Chad Perrin on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:07:41 -0600:
And then they can clone from there:
fossil clone http://user@127.0.0.1:/project
Thank you. This looks like it will probably suit our needs quite well
for the time being. I'll investigate further on my own at this point,
43 matches
Mail list logo
