Re: [fossil-users] getting rid of warning "can't open /dev/null"...

On 5/26/2015 3:02 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 5/26/15, Will Parsons wrote: >> On Tuesday, 26 May 2015 3:20 PM -0400, Richard Hipp wrote: >>> I think the best solution is to actually create a /dev/null and >>> /dev/urandom inside of your chroot jail. (That's what the >>> www.fossil-scm.org websi

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

On 2015-05-29 19:19, Ron W wrote: I suspect, in most case, multiple independent branches with the same name are not a problem. But trunk is a special case that may warrant a warning. I don't think I'd take that suspicion to the bank. Personally, I think it should warn on duplication of an ex

Re: [fossil-users] trunk closed??

Matt Welland writes: > "We emphatically do NOT want Fossil second-guessing what branch you > want to be on when you do "fossil update" without an argument." > > [...] > The right thing from a user perspective is to either WARN the user > that the branch was swizzled out from under them or WARN th

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

Thus said to...@acm.org on Sat, 30 May 2015 01:29:10 +0300: > As to what happened you probably guessed right. I must have used the > --branch option from within the 'mistake' branch. I was (until just > now) under the impression that the --branch option either starts a new > branch (if the na

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 6:29 PM, wrote: > As to what happened you probably guessed right. I must have used the > --branch option from within the 'mistake' branch. I was (until just now) > under the impression that the --branch option either starts a new branch > (if the name given is not alread

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

Thus said to...@acm.org on Sat, 30 May 2015 01:29:10 +0300: > And, using --force does nothing, of course. Actually, it does. Did you try to run ``fossil ci'' after running ``fossil merge --force'' to actually commit your changes? There will be no files changed as part of the merge,

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

FOSSIL MERGE would have been my guess too but it gives this message: "Merge skipped because it is a no-op. Use --force to override." And, using --force does nothing, of course. So, the timeline is still the same. But, come to think of it, fossil merge should logically fix the problem, even

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

Thus said to...@acm.org on Fri, 29 May 2015 22:18:00 +0300: > Check-in d137 was originally trunk but moved to a branch ``mistake.'' > (I guess shunning would have been a better solution at the time, but > too late now, right?) Actually, shunning was probably never a better solution for this ki

Re: [fossil-users] trunk closed??

"We emphatically do NOT want Fossil second-guessing what branch you want to be on when you do "fossil update" without an argument." Whatever option you decide - either way you are second guessing the users intent. 1. Current behavior is really, really confusing. 2. You *were* on trunk but magical

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

(BTW, this is a private repo). So, if this is a new feature, it means the problem was there all along and I simply now found out about it! Great! What I see at that time is the following (I hope the image won’t disappear – if it does, get it here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ozzicm164dc2o0d/fork

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

On 5/29/15, to...@acm.org wrote: > I updated to this recent version of fossil: > This is fossil version 1.33 [282ae5e4de] 2015-05-28 17:05:13 UTC > Compiled on May 28 2015 21:56:18 using msc-18.00 (32-bit) > SQLite 3.8.10.2 2015-05-20 18:17:19 2ef4f3a5b1 > Schema version 2015-01-24 > zlib 1.2.8, l

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

Thus said to...@acm.org on Fri, 29 May 2015 20:57:16 +0300: > (1) 2015-05-29 17:48:57 [eba9fa6147] (current) > (2) 2014-11-05 13:36:22 [91ef16c613] What artifacts are these? Fossil doesn't have them: https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/eba9fa6147 https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

Thus said to...@acm.org on Fri, 29 May 2015 20:57:16 +0300: > Is my repo corrupt or what's wrong with the new (or the old) version? Did you remember to make clean before building and optionally rerun ./configure? Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 40005568acbb ___

Re: [fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

On 29 May 2015 at 10:57, wrote: > Is my repo corrupt or what’s wrong with the new (or the old) version? This is the new advisory system in 1.33: https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/changes.wiki Improved fork detection on fossil update, fossil status and related commands. Add fos

[fossil-users] WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk:

I updated to this recent version of fossil: This is fossil version 1.33 [282ae5e4de] 2015-05-28 17:05:13 UTC Compiled on May 28 2015 21:56:18 using msc-18.00 (32-bit) SQLite 3.8.10.2 2015-05-20 18:17:19 2ef4f3a5b1 Schema version 2015-01-24 zlib 1.2.8, loaded 1.2.8 SSL (OpenSSL 1.0.2a 19 Mar 2015) U

Re: [fossil-users] trunk closed??

On Fri, 29 May 2015 17:38:39 +0200, Richard Hipp wrote: On 5/29/15, Matt Welland wrote: This is an exceedingly confusing behavior from fossil but the fix is easy. Just do "fossil up trunk". Indeed - Fossil is doing exactly the right thing here. If you just "fossil update" it advances yo

Re: [fossil-users] trunk closed??

On 29 May 2015 at 08:38, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 5/29/15, Matt Welland wrote: >> This is an exceedingly confusing behavior from fossil but the fix is easy. >> Just do "fossil up trunk". >> > > Indeed - Fossil is doing exactly the right thing here. If you just > "fossil update" it advances you t

Re: [fossil-users] trunk closed??

On 5/29/15, Matt Welland wrote: > This is an exceedingly confusing behavior from fossil but the fix is easy. > Just do "fossil up trunk". > Indeed - Fossil is doing exactly the right thing here. If you just "fossil update" it advances you to the tip of whatever branch your are currently on. If

Re: [fossil-users] trunk closed??

This is an exceedingly confusing behavior from fossil but the fix is easy. Just do "fossil up trunk". On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 5/28/15, jungle Boogie wrote: > > Hello All, > > > > I follow and update from trunk pretty regularly...this is how I notice > > those

Re: [fossil-users] how to move commits to a different branch

Hi Andy, On 29 May 2015 at 07:45, Andy Bradford wrote: > Anyone else have an opinion on whether or not ``fossil edit'' should > exist? I think it's a good idea as it will support additional edit commands that we don't yet know about. -- --- inum: 883510009027723 sip: jungleboo...@sip2s

Re: [fossil-users] how to move commits to a different branch

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Andy Bradford wrote: > Thus said Luca Ferrari on Fri, 29 May 2015 13:59:17 +0200: > > > But if I could say, the option "newbranch" does not look good at me, > > since it a little too long. > > Fossil can have both long and short names for a given option,

Re: [fossil-users] how to move commits to a different branch

Thus said Luca Ferrari on Fri, 29 May 2015 13:59:17 +0200: > But if I could say, the option "newbranch" does not look good at me, > since it a little too long. Fossil can have both long and short names for a given option, but perhaps --newbranch is too long. What about just --branch? An

Re: [fossil-users] how to move commits to a different branch

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 7:59 AM, Luca Ferrari wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Andy Bradford > wrote: > > fossil edit UUID ?OPTIONS? > > I'll second that! > But if I could say, the option "newbranch" does not look good at me, > since it a little too long. Coming from git I'm used to a s

Re: [fossil-users] minor: broken hyperlink in fossil web site

On 5/29/15, Eric Rubin-Smith wrote: > From the download page for v1.33, "Improved ability to customize the > timelime graph " is a broken > link. > Tnx. Should be working better now. -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org _

[fossil-users] minor: broken hyperlink in fossil web site

>From the download page for v1.33, "Improved ability to customize the timelime graph " is a broken link. ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/ma

Re: [fossil-users] how to move commits to a different branch

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Andy Bradford wrote: > fossil edit UUID ?OPTIONS? I'll second that! But if I could say, the option "newbranch" does not look good at me, since it a little too long. Coming from git I'm used to a short command line, while fossil tend to be quite verbose commands. B