Re: [fossil-users] Running script on push
trying to run this from command line: fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/test?a=1; fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/test; fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/; fossil test-th-eval 'http http://www.google.com; While on the other side I keep a nc -klv 8085 running. I only get this whenever I execute the command: TH_ERROR: url not allowed Tried using -asynchronous, but same results. What am I doing wrong ___ 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] Running script on push
2014-06-12 13:32 GMT+02:00 Abilio Marques amarq...@smartappsla.com: trying to run this from command line: fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/test?a=1; fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/test; fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/; fossil test-th-eval 'http http://www.google.com; While on the other side I keep a nc -klv 8085 running. I only get this whenever I execute the command: TH_ERROR: url not allowed Tried using -asynchronous, but same results. What am I doing wrong You should set the th1-uri-regexp setting to .* or http://localhost:8085/.*; (in your case). This is a security measure. Regards, Jan Nijtmans ___ 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] Running script on push
While looking for hooks history in Fossil (as Ron Wilson said I wasn't the
first) I came into this:
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/pipermail/fossil-users/2011-January/003921.html
Where D. Richard Hipp said that:
...But in order to implement this different mechanism, I need example
C code for launching a background process in windows that is not
associated with an console. Doing that is easy in Unix,but I'm not
sure how to do it in windows. ...
I used to work with Windows, so I wrote a tiny demo that I hope suits what
Richard needed. It's attached into this email. I rather go directly into a
shell that having to set up a server. Ran it with mingw, and I'm pretty
sure will run with any Microsoft compiler.
This one will print it was a great day whenever executed from the command
line, with one or more parameters. If I run it as a spawned process, it
won't print anything at all into the console. I want to check if this is
the needed behaviour. Please Richard, can you confirm it, or tell me
exactly what you need. I can write the Windows counterpart of the Unix
code, and even test it (have one MS box at home).
PS: thanks for the security measure, I will test it ASAP
2014-06-12 7:06 GMT-04:30 Jan Nijtmans jan.nijtm...@gmail.com:
2014-06-12 13:32 GMT+02:00 Abilio Marques amarq...@smartappsla.com:
trying to run this from command line:
fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/test?a=1;
fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/test;
fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/;
fossil test-th-eval 'http http://www.google.com;
While on the other side I keep a nc -klv 8085 running. I only get this
whenever I execute the command: TH_ERROR: url not allowed
Tried using -asynchronous, but same results. What am I doing wrong
You should set the th1-uri-regexp setting to .* or
http://localhost:8085/.*; (in your case).
This is a security measure.
Regards,
Jan Nijtmans
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
#include stdio.h
#include stdlib.h
#include process.h
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
unsigned int res;
char cmdName[] = test.exe;
if (argc == 1) {
printf(spawning a process...\n);
// several functions in the _spawn family, for reference check: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/20y988d2.aspx
res = _spawnl(_P_DETACH, cmdName, cmdName, 1, NULL); // _P_DETACH, wont do anything with the console, as D. Richard Hipp wanted
printf(%u\n, res);
system(PAUSE);
} else {
// yeah, like this is a test, it spawned itself, but writes into a file whenever is run with parameters
FILE *f = fopen(C:\\washere,a);
fprintf(f, I was here);
fclose(f);
printf(it was a great day\n);
}
return 0;
}
___
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] Running script on push
About the regexp setting, tried: set th1-uri-regexp .* http -asynchronous http://localhost:8085 With and without quote marks, didn't work. I ran it from the command line, and it still says: url not allowed... hints? 2014-06-12 8:12 GMT-04:30 Abilio Marques amarq...@smartappsla.com: While looking for hooks history in Fossil (as Ron Wilson said I wasn't the first) I came into this: http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/pipermail/fossil-users/2011-January/003921.html Where D. Richard Hipp said that: ...But in order to implement this different mechanism, I need example C code for launching a background process in windows that is not associated with an console. Doing that is easy in Unix,but I'm not sure how to do it in windows. ... I used to work with Windows, so I wrote a tiny demo that I hope suits what Richard needed. It's attached into this email. I rather go directly into a shell that having to set up a server. Ran it with mingw, and I'm pretty sure will run with any Microsoft compiler. This one will print it was a great day whenever executed from the command line, with one or more parameters. If I run it as a spawned process, it won't print anything at all into the console. I want to check if this is the needed behaviour. Please Richard, can you confirm it, or tell me exactly what you need. I can write the Windows counterpart of the Unix code, and even test it (have one MS box at home). PS: thanks for the security measure, I will test it ASAP 2014-06-12 7:06 GMT-04:30 Jan Nijtmans jan.nijtm...@gmail.com: 2014-06-12 13:32 GMT+02:00 Abilio Marques amarq...@smartappsla.com: trying to run this from command line: fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/test?a=1; fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/test; fossil test-th-eval 'http http://localhost:8085/; fossil test-th-eval 'http http://www.google.com; While on the other side I keep a nc -klv 8085 running. I only get this whenever I execute the command: TH_ERROR: url not allowed Tried using -asynchronous, but same results. What am I doing wrong You should set the th1-uri-regexp setting to .* or http://localhost:8085/.*; (in your case). This is a security measure. Regards, Jan Nijtmans ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ 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] Running script on push
2014-06-12 14:56 GMT+02:00 Abilio Marques amarq...@smartappsla.com: About the regexp setting, tried: set th1-uri-regexp .* http -asynchronous http://localhost:8085 fossil settings th1-uri-regexp \.\*(on UNIX) or fossil settings th1-uri-regexp ;.*(on Windows) (the ';' on Windows is just a trick to prevent filename-expansion, as the backslash does not work) Or do fossil ui and go to the Admin/Settings page. Regards, Jan Nijtmans ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
Sorry for the vague message, but I don't have a specific test case. Twice this week, I encountered a situation where I did a commit from one machine, and an update from the second -- and the second did not get the latest updates. The first time was about a week ago; the second time was a few minutes ago where I've updated all machines to the latest Fossil. Any ideas on what to do if this happens again? So far my only recourse has been to clone again, since nothing else fixed the problem. Thanks, Ron -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org wrote: Sorry for the vague message, but I don't have a specific test case. Twice this week, I encountered a situation where I did a commit from one machine, and an update from the second -- and the second did not get the latest updates. The first time was about a week ago; the second time was a few minutes ago where I've updated all machines to the latest Fossil. Any ideas on what to do if this happens again? So far my only recourse has been to clone again, since nothing else fixed the problem. Add the --verily option to the fossil sync and that should clear the problem. There is a bug somewhere that causes this. We haven't been able to locate it yet. Running sync once with --verily clears that problem such that it normally does not occur again. -- 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
Great! Thanks for the tip, and hope the bug is found... Best regards, Ron On 06/12/2014 05:43 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org mailto:r...@ronware.org wrote: Sorry for the vague message, but I don't have a specific test case. Twice this week, I encountered a situation where I did a commit from one machine, and an update from the second -- and the second did not get the latest updates. The first time was about a week ago; the second time was a few minutes ago where I've updated all machines to the latest Fossil. Any ideas on what to do if this happens again? So far my only recourse has been to clone again, since nothing else fixed the problem. Add the --verily option to the fossil sync and that should clear the problem. There is a bug somewhere that causes this. We haven't been able to locate it yet. Running sync once with --verily clears that problem such that it normally does not occur again. -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org mailto: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 -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] Intent to release version 1.29
On 6/11/2014 09:33, Stephan Beal wrote: On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 4:09 PM, JR jr...@saintlyreverend.com mailto:jr...@saintlyreverend.com wrote: Alternatively, you can add the location of Fossil to your PATH or the system PATH. A minor _potential_ caveat: back when i used Windows/DOS (last millennium!) batch files could only pass on up to 9 (%1 ... %9, IIRC) All these problems go away if you use the Cygwin version of Fossil. Bash is approximately 1e6 times more powerful than cmd.exe, and you get the binary in the proper place to start with. ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
Thus said Ron Aaron on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:40:02 +0300: Twice this week, I encountered a situation where I did a commit from one machine, and an update from the second -- and the second did not get the latest updates. What sync method was used on the first machine? On the second machine? Are both clones of a the same repository URL? Or is the second a clone of the first? Any details about the setup that might provide some clues? This has been mentioned before a few times, but so far, nobody has been able to provide enough details to reproduce it and none of the Fossil devs have seen it. If it happens again will you provide the output of both the commit from one machine and the update from the second? At least that would be a start. Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 40005399ceaf ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
OK, my second fossil question in one day: I recently moved my repo from standard http to https (behind Apache) My linux machines had no problem with the change over. But the OS/X machine cannot connect to my repo. I get: SSL: cannot connect to host ...:443 () Pull finished with 0 bytes sent, 0 bytes received I can ping the host from the Mac, and I can also openssl client to it. I don't know if this is a Mac or a fossil problem... any ideas? Best regards, Ron -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
It's OS/X 10.8.5, just in case it makes a difference. On 06/12/2014 07:06 PM, Ron Aaron wrote: OK, my second fossil question in one day: I recently moved my repo from standard http to https (behind Apache) My linux machines had no problem with the change over. But the OS/X machine cannot connect to my repo. I get: SSL: cannot connect to host ...:443 () Pull finished with 0 bytes sent, 0 bytes received I can ping the host from the Mac, and I can also openssl client to it. I don't know if this is a Mac or a fossil problem... any ideas? Best regards, Ron ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org wrote: It's OS/X 10.8.5, just in case it makes a difference. Did you compile Fossil yourself, or are you using a precompiled-download? -- 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org wrote: It's OS/X 10.8.5, just in case it makes a difference. Did you compile Fossil yourself, or are you using a precompiled-download? And, can you clone from https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil? -- 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] Intent to release version 1.29
I will avoid the rant I had just written and simply say that I do not use cmd.exe except where required. I use PowerShell exclusively, which makes cmd.exe look like the ancient tool it is, and there are debates that PowerShell is better than bash due to its use of objects instead of straight text (I suck at regex, so I prefer objects). I will leave that flame war for another day, as I like bash on *nix machines and love PowerShell on Windows. I just don't like to mix the two :). On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Warren Young war...@etr-usa.com wrote: On 6/11/2014 09:33, Stephan Beal wrote: On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 4:09 PM, JR jr...@saintlyreverend.com mailto:jr...@saintlyreverend.com wrote: Alternatively, you can add the location of Fossil to your PATH or the system PATH. A minor _potential_ caveat: back when i used Windows/DOS (last millennium!) batch files could only pass on up to 9 (%1 ... %9, IIRC) All these problems go away if you use the Cygwin version of Fossil. Bash is approximately 1e6 times more powerful than cmd.exe, and you get the binary in the proper place to start with. ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
Compiled from the latest sources On 06/12/2014 07:43 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org mailto:r...@ronware.org wrote: It's OS/X 10.8.5, just in case it makes a difference. Did you compile Fossil yourself, or are you using a precompiled-download? -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org mailto: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 -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
Yes, it does work from the fossil repo. So might it be related to my certificate? I have a cert from startcom, which usually is fine. On 06/12/2014 07:44 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org mailto:d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org mailto:r...@ronware.org wrote: It's OS/X 10.8.5, just in case it makes a difference. Did you compile Fossil yourself, or are you using a precompiled-download? And, can you clone from https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil? -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org mailto: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 -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org wrote: Yes, it does work from the fossil repo. So might it be related to my certificate? I have a cert from startcom, which usually is fine. If it works on the Fossil repo, that does suggest that something isn't quite right on your server. But I don't know what it might be. -- 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
Fair enough. I'm attempting to switch to ssh instead of https for this particular machine On 06/12/2014 08:18 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org mailto:r...@ronware.org wrote: Yes, it does work from the fossil repo. So might it be related to my certificate? I have a cert from startcom, which usually is fine. If it works on the Fossil repo, that does suggest that something isn't quite right on your server. But I don't know what it might be. -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org mailto: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 -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
ok, ssh works great, so I'll ignore the weird ssl behavior for now thanks On 06/12/2014 08:18 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org mailto:r...@ronware.org wrote: Yes, it does work from the fossil repo. So might it be related to my certificate? I have a cert from startcom, which usually is fine. If it works on the Fossil repo, that does suggest that something isn't quite right on your server. But I don't know what it might be. -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org mailto: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 -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: This has been mentioned before a few times, but so far, nobody has been able to provide enough details to reproduce it and none of the Fossil devs have seen it. It's come up 3 or 4 times the past year, IIRC. i _might_ have seen it once, but i might have just forgotten to pull in that case. Nobody's been able to consistently reproduce it, nor come up with a hint about where it may lie. i _think_ (but my memory's far from perfect) we ruled out a caching proxy server in the middle in at least one case. If it happens again will you provide the output of both the commit from one machine and the update from the second? At least that would be a start. +1 -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Freedom is sloppy. But 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
I use Windows and a StartCom certificate, but I have to specify the root CA cert using ssl-ca-location. Does Fossil on Linux use built-in trusted root CAs? On Windows it does not; maybe OSX has similar behavior. I think fossil usually throws a root certificate error, though, when it cannot validate the remote certificate, but just thought I would offer this. JR On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org wrote: ok, ssh works great, so I'll ignore the weird ssl behavior for now thanks On 06/12/2014 08:18 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Ron Aaron r...@ronware.org wrote: Yes, it does work from the fossil repo. So might it be related to my certificate? I have a cert from startcom, which usually is fine. If it works on the Fossil repo, that does suggest that something isn't quite right on your server. But I don't know what it might be. -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing listfossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.orghttp://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG keyhttp://ronware.org/gpg_key.html ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] Version 1.29
Fossil version 1.29 has been tagged and published. Visit http://www.fossil-scm.org/download for precompiled binaries and sources as well as a list of significant changes. Please report problems to this mailing list, or directly to me. Thanks. -- 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
On 12/06/14 18:06, Ron Aaron wrote: OK, my second fossil question in one day: I recently moved my repo from standard http to https (behind Apache) My linux machines had no problem with the change over. But the OS/X machine cannot connect to my repo. I get: SSL: cannot connect to host ...:443 () Pull finished with 0 bytes sent, 0 bytes received I can ping the host from the Mac, and I can also openssl client to it. I don't know if this is a Mac or a fossil problem... any ideas? I use fossil on Mac OS X (client) against a NetBSD server running apache 2.2 (recently upgraded to 2.4), with full client certificate validation, and have been doing so for well over a year. Used to be running 10.8 and am now running 10.9. Apart from one or two isolated glitches, I've never had any problem. It should definitely work. The fact that it can't even connect feels a little strange.. Are you using a proxy? -- Kind Regards, Jan ___ 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
Nope, no proxy. And I can connect from my linux clients just fine. I tend to think it's related to the certificates. On 06/12/2014 09:25 PM, Jan Danielsson wrote: On 12/06/14 18:06, Ron Aaron wrote: OK, my second fossil question in one day: I recently moved my repo from standard http to https (behind Apache) My linux machines had no problem with the change over. But the OS/X machine cannot connect to my repo. I get: SSL: cannot connect to host ...:443 () Pull finished with 0 bytes sent, 0 bytes received I can ping the host from the Mac, and I can also openssl client to it. I don't know if this is a Mac or a fossil problem... any ideas? I use fossil on Mac OS X (client) against a NetBSD server running apache 2.2 (recently upgraded to 2.4), with full client certificate validation, and have been doing so for well over a year. Used to be running 10.8 and am now running 10.9. Apart from one or two isolated glitches, I've never had any problem. It should definitely work. The fact that it can't even connect feels a little strange.. Are you using a proxy? -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
On 12 June 2014 19:54, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: This has been mentioned before a few times, but so far, nobody has been able to provide enough details to reproduce it and none of the Fossil devs have seen it. It's come up 3 or 4 times the past year, IIRC. i _might_ have seen it once, but i might have just forgotten to pull in that case. Nobody's been able to consistently reproduce it, nor come up with a hint about where it may lie. i _think_ (but my memory's far from perfect) we ruled out a caching proxy server in the middle in at least one case. Right, I can confirm that. (commit on win32 host, autosync'd to repo on netbsd host, where the latter was 'running' fossil from inetd.) Michai ___ 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] Version 1.29
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: Fossil version 1.29 has been tagged and published. Visit http://www.fossil-scm.org/download for precompiled Correction: http://www.fossil-scm.org/download.html And thanks for the release :) -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Freedom is sloppy. But 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] Version 1.29
here's a problem report: URL fails to load :-) Document Not Found The document /download is not available on this server On 12 June 2014 20:24, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: Fossil version 1.29 has been tagged and published. Visit http://www.fossil-scm.org/download for precompiled binaries and sources as well as a list of significant changes. Please report problems to this mailing list, or directly to me. Thanks. -- 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 ___ 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] Version 1.29
so fast... thx :) On 12 June 2014 20:33, Michai Ramakers m.ramak...@gmail.com wrote: here's a problem report: URL fails to load :-) Document Not Found The document /download is not available on this server On 12 June 2014 20:24, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: Fossil version 1.29 has been tagged and published. Visit http://www.fossil-scm.org/download for precompiled binaries and sources as well as a list of significant changes. Please report problems to this mailing list, or directly to me. Thanks. -- 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 ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
I believe I have seen this issue. It's been a while, but here is the scenario as far as I can recollect: 1. Assume there are three repo copies in a master/client topology: M, C1, and C2. M is the master, and C1/C2 are clones of the master (meaning that C1 and C2 don't know about each other; they always push to and pull from M). No proxies anywhere. 2. M, C1, and C2 are all separated by low-bandwidth, high-latency links, which causes syncs to take a long time. 3. C1 creates a giant file, checks it in, and pushes it to M. The push completes. 4. C2 begins a pull. 5. During C2's pull, C1 creates a small file, checks it in, and pushes it to M. 6. A long time later, C2's pull completes. 7. C2 initiates another pull. But M does not report the new small file, so C2 does not see the new file. In my case, I worked around the issue by creating yet another artifact from C1. This seems to have caused M and/or C2 to sort themselves out. I have no idea how the sync code works, but at the time I suspected that there is some sort of optimization involving timestamps, and a slow sync can cause that code to get confused and miss some artifacts. May or may not have an interaction with sqlite's WAL setting (which allows reads concurrent with one write, if memory serves). Anyway, hopefully that won't send you on too big of a goose chase. On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: This has been mentioned before a few times, but so far, nobody has been able to provide enough details to reproduce it and none of the Fossil devs have seen it. It's come up 3 or 4 times the past year, IIRC. i _might_ have seen it once, but i might have just forgotten to pull in that case. Nobody's been able to consistently reproduce it, nor come up with a hint about where it may lie. i _think_ (but my memory's far from perfect) we ruled out a caching proxy server in the middle in at least one case. If it happens again will you provide the output of both the commit from one machine and the update from the second? At least that would be a start. +1 -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Freedom is sloppy. But 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 ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
It may be that you need to replace the one giant file in the below scenario with a great many files that as a whole take up a lot of bytes. I don't remember. Sorry. :-/ On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Eric Rubin-Smith eas@gmail.com wrote: I believe I have seen this issue. It's been a while, but here is the scenario as far as I can recollect: 1. Assume there are three repo copies in a master/client topology: M, C1, and C2. M is the master, and C1/C2 are clones of the master (meaning that C1 and C2 don't know about each other; they always push to and pull from M). No proxies anywhere. 2. M, C1, and C2 are all separated by low-bandwidth, high-latency links, which causes syncs to take a long time. 3. C1 creates a giant file, checks it in, and pushes it to M. The push completes. 4. C2 begins a pull. 5. During C2's pull, C1 creates a small file, checks it in, and pushes it to M. 6. A long time later, C2's pull completes. 7. C2 initiates another pull. But M does not report the new small file, so C2 does not see the new file. In my case, I worked around the issue by creating yet another artifact from C1. This seems to have caused M and/or C2 to sort themselves out. I have no idea how the sync code works, but at the time I suspected that there is some sort of optimization involving timestamps, and a slow sync can cause that code to get confused and miss some artifacts. May or may not have an interaction with sqlite's WAL setting (which allows reads concurrent with one write, if memory serves). Anyway, hopefully that won't send you on too big of a goose chase. On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: This has been mentioned before a few times, but so far, nobody has been able to provide enough details to reproduce it and none of the Fossil devs have seen it. It's come up 3 or 4 times the past year, IIRC. i _might_ have seen it once, but i might have just forgotten to pull in that case. Nobody's been able to consistently reproduce it, nor come up with a hint about where it may lie. i _think_ (but my memory's far from perfect) we ruled out a caching proxy server in the middle in at least one case. If it happens again will you provide the output of both the commit from one machine and the update from the second? At least that would be a start. +1 -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Freedom is sloppy. But 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 ___ 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
On 12/06/14 20:29, Ron Aaron wrote: Nope, no proxy. And I can connect from my linux clients just fine. I tend to think it's related to the certificates. openssl in Mac OS X is very old, so if you're using EC, RSA/PSS or something of the sort it could be an issue. -- Kind Regards, Jan ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] New Fossil SlackBuild
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I have submitted an updated Fossil SlackBuild script which will soon appear here: http://slackbuilds.org/repository/14.1/development/fossil/ - -- Andy Goth | andrew.m.goth/at/gmail/dot/com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTmgHoAAoJELtYwrrr47Y4r6QIAIVO/k8FTn44XLTq84WQXe1B i/8ikxWWhtl1g1u/0JcRGBGJyz2EuVWuHW0kSUqdOFXEfaTyQTKZX9FLhEUr+q5e Nzm8v8JwDUs744PMczfQogOWLoTmnOfEIIaosCWGP7sS+2EbHkPBjx+zhmXujxT4 c95iH363TsCRgkFGi0NtqGW5iJfzB9dL49sirSzjvIvzwwjN0Cle9kDedoJAZ8uj 1jrMGUHePkL9/vf11c2YhGW/Ie2Ye10tHcI3zNcosGI9mNfpcSLT4NRYLNw1Z19P +3IF+BBAJVdAN3vCQ89ZrDC5UP1j92HyeFA5dqXyByXruwfHgtEZ2EQa3g0r3vk= =SreX -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 02:46:09PM -0400, Eric Rubin-Smith wrote: I believe I have seen this issue. It's been a while, but here is the scenario as far as I can recollect: 1. Assume there are three repo copies in a master/client topology: M, C1, and C2. M is the master, and C1/C2 are clones of the master (meaning that C1 and C2 don't know about each other; they always push to and pull from M). No proxies anywhere. 2. M, C1, and C2 are all separated by low-bandwidth, high-latency links, which causes syncs to take a long time. 3. C1 creates a giant file, checks it in, and pushes it to M. The push completes. 4. C2 begins a pull. 5. During C2's pull, C1 creates a small file, checks it in, and pushes it to M. 6. A long time later, C2's pull completes. 7. C2 initiates another pull. But M does not report the new small file, so C2 does not see the new file. In my case, I worked around the issue by creating yet another artifact from C1. This seems to have caused M and/or C2 to sort themselves out. I have no idea how the sync code works, but at the time I suspected that there is some sort of optimization involving timestamps, and a slow sync can cause that code to get confused and miss some artifacts. May or may not have an interaction with sqlite's WAL setting (which allows reads concurrent with one write, if memory serves). Anyway, hopefully that won't send you on too big of a goose chase. I got same issue recently and I'm also using WAL mode. My topology is like this: M: Master (Linux and main development machine, db in WAL mode) C1: clone 1 (autosync with Master) (windows laptop through slow connection) C2: clone 2 (autosync with Master) (Linux, on LAN with fast connection) BK: clone 3 Offsite backup repo (no checkout, master push to it frequently) When the problem happens (e.g. C1 don't get latest change that was pushed by C2), I pull from BK instead and it works. Then it's okay for the next sync.. (I never try the --verily option, I was not aware of it) In your example above, have you try to pull directly changes of C1 from C2 ? example: fossil pull http://user@C1/path/to/repo.fossil --once [snip] Hopefully this will give some hints to track the problem.. -- Martin G. ___ 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] Running script on push
Ran it like this: fossil test-th-eval set th1-uri-regexp \.\* ; http https://localhost:8085; still nothing... 2014-06-12 8:45 GMT-04:30 Jan Nijtmans jan.nijtm...@gmail.com: 2014-06-12 14:56 GMT+02:00 Abilio Marques amarq...@smartappsla.com: About the regexp setting, tried: set th1-uri-regexp .* http -asynchronous http://localhost:8085 fossil settings th1-uri-regexp \.\*(on UNIX) or fossil settings th1-uri-regexp ;.*(on Windows) (the ';' on Windows is just a trick to prevent filename-expansion, as the backslash does not work) Or do fossil ui and go to the Admin/Settings page. Regards, Jan Nijtmans ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ 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] Intent to release version 1.29
On Thursday, June 12, 2014, JR jr...@saintlyreverend.com wrote: I will avoid the rant I had just written and simply say that I do not use cmd.exe except where required. I use PowerShell exclusively, which makes cmd.exe look like the ancient tool it is, and there are debates that PowerShell is better than bash due to its use of objects instead of straight text (I suck at regex, so I prefer objects). I will leave that flame war for another day, as I like bash on *nix machines and love PowerShell on Windows. I just don't like to mix the two :). I really want something like a powershell for Unix, but still somewhat similar to the typical Unix shell, and with JSON as the object representation (since that will play best with existing tools, the environment, and command-line arguments). Ideally i'd want something like jq (https://stedolan.github.io/jq -- something of an awesome JSON query language as an inspiration for such a shell. Nico Full disclosure: I am a contributor to and maintainer of jq, but biased as I am by this, I think one can objectively say that Stephen Dolan did an awesome job. ___ 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] can fossil try harder on sync failure?
Thus said Matt Welland on Wed, 16 Apr 2014 09:01:28 -0700: Could fossil silently retry a couple times instead of giving up so easily? Not silent, but it can retry: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/76bc297e96211b50d7b7e518ba45663c80889f1f This still won't avoid the occasional fork if the user answers ``Yes'' to the question, but it will try as many times as you configure it to try. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000539a77ca ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
On 06/12/2014 11:31 PM, Martin Gagnon wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 02:46:09PM -0400, Eric Rubin-Smith wrote: I believe I have seen this issue. It's been a while, but here is the scenario as far as I can recollect: 1. Assume there are three repo copies in a master/client topology: M, C1, and C2. M is the master, and C1/C2 are clones of the master (meaning that C1 and C2 don't know about each other; they always push to and pull from M). No proxies anywhere. 2. M, C1, and C2 are all separated by low-bandwidth, high-latency links, which ... I got same issue recently and I'm also using WAL mode. My topology is like this: M: Master (Linux and main development machine, db in WAL mode) C1: clone 1 (autosync with Master) (windows laptop through slow connection) C2: clone 2 (autosync with Master) (Linux, on LAN with fast connection) BK: clone 3 Offsite backup repo (no checkout, master push to it frequently) Ah, maybe there is something here! I have almost the same scenario as you, but M is a laptop while C1 and C2 are dev machines and C1 also runs a backup script against M, pulling repos. So I could have the situation where C1 pushes and is also pulling (though locks should prevent any problems), and later on C2 pulls. I don't have the super-long-time push, but it does seem to occur more often when the push involves a large number (or number of bytes) of files. -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
Thus said Ron Aaron on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 07:43:25 +0300: So I could have the situation where C1 pushes and is also pulling (though locks should prevent any problems), and later on C2 pulls. I don't have the super-long-time push, but it does seem to occur more often when the push involves a large number (or number of bytes) of files. While I was working on making autosync make more passes, I hammered a test repository like this: M1: jot 100 | while read x; do dd if=/dev/urandom bs=1k count=100 | hexdump file.$x; done fossil ci -m test M2: echo $RANDOM file fossil ci (or sometimes fossil update). Either way, this made for massive transfers and I never ran into this issue. The laptop representing M2 was on a slower wifi link (not LAN) and it would often take about 60 seconds to transfer. I even sometimes through in an additional commit on M1 while M2 was still transfering and I still found all expected content on M2 after all was said and done. I can continue to try this route to see if there might be something. By the way, what version of Fossil are you running on your clients (and server)? Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000539a88f7 ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
Thus said Eric Rubin-Smith on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 14:46:09 -0400: I have no idea how the sync code works, but at the time I suspected that there is some sort of optimization involving timestamps, and a slow sync can cause that code to get confused and miss some artifacts. May or may not have an interaction with sqlite's WAL setting (which allows reads concurrent with one write, if memory serves). The steps you mentioned are almost identical to how I tested the autosync-tries code I was working with a few exceptions. I didn't have C2 (all changes were made on M and then C1 pulled). I generated a lot of largish files (rather than 1 large file) and then made practically a 100% rewrite of each file with random data. Then committed and pulled from a slow client which made for long transfer times (about 60 seconds). The other difference is that I was not using WAL. I might go back and try your setup with WAL to see if there is any difference---I don't see how it could make a difference, but it might be worth it. One other thing that might be helpful is a little bisection. If the next time someone runs into the problem could try various versions of Fossil (e.g. if the problem shows up with 1.28, go back to 1.27 and do an update to see if the missing content shows up, etc...), that would help narrow down when this particular event started happening. Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000539a8ac5 ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
Hi Andy - On 06/13/2014 08:15 AM, Andy Bradford wrote: I can continue to try this route to see if there might be something. By the way, what version of Fossil are you running on your clients (and server)? As I said, I'm not sure what the problem is, but it seems to have happened more often with massive checkins or large numbers of files. In my particular case, the server and clients are all running the latest fossil -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] SSL issue on Mac OS/X?
Ah, that would explain it then. I recently upgraded my servers to use perfect-forward-secrecy, and removed all the older algorithms. So probably that's exactly what the problem is, nothing to do with the certificates - just old crufty version of openssl. Bummer. Thanks for the tip Ron On 06/12/2014 09:55 PM, Jan Danielsson wrote: On 12/06/14 20:29, Ron Aaron wrote: Nope, no proxy. And I can connect from my linux clients just fine. I tend to think it's related to the certificates. openssl in Mac OS X is very old, so if you're using EC, RSA/PSS or something of the sort it could be an issue. -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] Sometimes fossil doesn't sync properly
In the case yesterday they were edits. In a previous one it was a large amount of deletes, in a more distant one it was an addition of two large files. Essentially, I do a fossil upd and the timeline does not show the new checkin at all. If I look at the main repo, I see the checkin just fine, and if I do a clone I do get it. So it's not that anything is actually missing, but rather that the sync seems to get confused in some situations. On 06/13/2014 08:47 AM, Andy Bradford wrote: Thus said Ron Aaron on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 08:22:29 +0300: As I said, I'm not sure what the problem is, but it seems to have happened more often with massive checkins or large numbers of files. Are the missing artifacts new files, or edits to existing files? Thanks, Andy -- For confidential messages, please use my GnuPG key http://ronware.org/gpg_key.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
