At 10:43 AM 12/23/2010, Richard Hipp wrote:
>I had to install zlib in \mingw\include and \mingw\lib but
>otherwise no changes were made to the MinGW installation.
>
>Windows users - please try this on your machines and let me know
>if you have problems. Thanks everyone for your help in fixing
And on 64-bit Win7
This is fossil version [4ba6a2c96f] 2010-12-23 18:26:37 UTC
From: Clark Christensen
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Sent: Thu, December 23, 2010 12:33:26 PM
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] Errors during compile in Windows 7 x64
Worked h
Worked here on 32-bit Win7. I'll see if it does the same for me on 64-bit
Win7. But I don't have mingw or msys on that box yet.
-Clark
From: Richard Hipp
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Sent: Thu, December 23, 2010 10:43:53 AM
Subject: Re: [fossil-use
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 09:24:46PM +0100, Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote:
> You can build fossil with any Express (free) edition of Visual Studio (with
> the
> Visual C compiler). VS2010 Express is just fine.
> It comes with a batch script that will put all its programs in the PATH. It
> also
> put
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 07:29:13PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
> I spent a very frustrating morning on Monday, downloading mingw and trying
> to get the makefile to work on a new windows7 box I have sitting off to
> might right. It appears that getting the makefile to work on win7 will be
> very ha
__
> Od: "Richard Hipp"
> Komu: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> Datum: 23.12.2010 19:44
> Předmět: Re: [fossil-users] Errors during compile in Windows 7 x64
>
>I now have the build working using mingw on my windows7 box. Using the
>
I now have the build working using mingw on my windows7 box. Using the
latest Fossil sources:
\mingw\msys\1.0\bin\make -f win/Makefile.mingw
I had to install zlib in \mingw\include and \mingw\lib but otherwise no
changes were made to the MinGW installation.
Windows users - please try this
You can use eclipse IDE to refactor C code.
-Original Message-
From: Stephan Beal
To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
Sent: Thu, Dec 23, 2010 10:24 pm
Subject: Re: [fossil-users] An annecdote on screwing up (and
recovering) a broken fossil repo
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Steph
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
> That was my concern too. So maybe I make .fos the default on unix and
> _FOSSIL_ the default on
>
windows?
>
That might break some forms of automation, like cygwin makefiles which want
to use or ignore that file, or scripts which fetch info
ack in default mode ignores both _FOSSIL_ and .fos. ack -u searches
both, so changing it wouldn't have helped me either
--
Joshua Paine
LetterBlock: Web applications built with joy
http://letterblock.com/
301-576-1920
___
fossil-users mailing list
foss
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Stephan Beal wrote:
> Again, i don't consider this to be a fossil problem, but stupid user error.
>
Another point: this "problem" was a side-effect of my own personal workflow,
using an operation which has obvious risks of making unwanted changes (e.g.
i didn't p
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
> For a long time now, Fossil has accepted two possible names for the
> check-out database: "_FOSSIL_" or ".fos". You can see this by doing:
>
i didn't know that, but the _FOSSIL_ file has never given me any problems,
so i always ignore it (
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger <
jo...@britannica.bec.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:30:53AM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Gour wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 09:44:25 -0500
> > > >> "Richard" == Richard Hipp wrote:
> > >
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:30:53AM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Gour wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 09:44:25 -0500
> > >> "Richard" == Richard Hipp wrote:
> >
> > Richard> I'm wondering if I should make ".fos" the default instead of
> > Richard> "_FOSSIL_".
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Gour wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 09:44:25 -0500
> >> "Richard" == Richard Hipp wrote:
>
> Richard> I'm wondering if I should make ".fos" the default instead of
> Richard> "_FOSSIL_". Would xargs have picked up on the "dot-file" named
> Richard> ".fos" as it
On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 09:44:25 -0500
>> "Richard" == Richard Hipp wrote:
Richard> I'm wondering if I should make ".fos" the default instead of
Richard> "_FOSSIL_". Would xargs have picked up on the "dot-file" named
Richard> ".fos" as it did with _FOSSIL? Would the use of .fos instead
Richard> o
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Stephan Beal wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Joshua Paine wrote:
>
>> I have done this exact thing (except I used sed and ack instead of perl
>> and find :-) in the last week. I just deleted my _FOSSIL_ file and
>> re-opened the repo in the same dir.
>>
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Stephan Beal wrote:
>
> After a moment it was clear what i had done - a text replace in _FOSSIL_,
> which of course corrupted it.
>
>
Thanks for the story, and the warning
For a long time now, Fossil has accepted two possible names for the
check-out database:
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Joshua Paine wrote:
> I have done this exact thing (except I used sed and ack instead of perl
> and find :-) in the last week. I just deleted my _FOSSIL_ file and
> re-opened the repo in the same dir.
>
That was my first instinct, but i remembered the recent post
On 12/23/2010 09:28 AM, Stephan Beal wrote:
> i was doing some "old-school-style" refactoring
I have done this exact thing (except I used sed and ack instead of perl
and find :-) in the last week. I just deleted my _FOSSIL_ file and
re-opened the repo in the same dir.
--
Joshua Paine
LetterBlo
Single fossil.exe, single repository.fossil and single _FOSSIL_. That's
why I love fossil :)
- Altu
-Original Message-
From: Stephan Beal
To: fossil-users
Sent: Thu, Dec 23, 2010 7:58 pm
Subject: [fossil-users] An annecdote on screwing up (and recovering) a
broken fossil repo
Hello
Hello, fellow fossilers,
A few minutes ago i made a horrible mistake in a fossil repo and felt
compelled to post a minor warning/gotcha for other developers out there. The
solution to the mistake also points out a nice side-effect of the
single-file _FOSSIL_ metadata approach (as opposed to using
On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 13:49:39 + (GMT)
mailer-dae...@sqlite.org (Mail Delivery System) wrote:
> This is the mail system at host sqlite.org.
>
> I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not
> be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.
>
> For further assistance,
23 matches
Mail list logo
