> Subject: Re: [fossil-users] Linux binary downloads
> On 2/20/17, Emil Totev wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> There are still inconsistencies in the binary downloads for linux at
>> fossil's web site.
>>
>> File fossil-linux-x86-1.37.tar.gz contains a x64 (64-
Hi
There are still inconsistencies in the binary downloads for linux at
fossil's web site.
File fossil-linux-x86-1.37.tar.gz contains a x64 (64-bit) executable.
There seems to be no 32-bit linux executable download.
Could someone please fix that for this and future builds?
Regards
Emil
___
Hi
There was a thread some time ago about the 1.36 linux binary download,
but probably because it got hijacked by a troll, there hasn't been any
reaction.
Unlike previous releases which were ZIP files, the linux download is
now a tar.gz, and it contains a dynamically linked 64bit executable
inste
Hi
Is there any reason that the default fossil download for linux has
been complied without SSL support, while the windows version has it?
Would it be possible to add the SSL support for linux, or add a
separate download option?
In the meantime, is there somewhere an easily accessible download si
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Emil Totev wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> This is fossil version 1.21 [002580c50d] 2011-12-13 13:53:56 UTC
>> on Windows 7 SP1
>>
>> I have configured winmerge a
Hi
This is fossil version 1.21 [002580c50d] 2011-12-13 13:53:56 UTC
on Windows 7 SP1
I have configured winmerge as my gdiff-command and it works fine for me
with `fossil gdiff`, however it doesn't work with `fossil stash gdiff`.
Winmerge starts with an empty screen for each modified file.
It see
Yes, this one works as expected.
So it is a build issue?
Thanks
Emil
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Dmitry Chestnykh
wrote:
>> What should matter here is that it DOES work with the previous fossil
>> version (1.18) and does NOT work with 1.19 - so obviously _something_
>> changed in fossil its
Well, I am normally using TCC/LE as my shell, but just confirmed it is
the same with CMD.EXE.
What should matter here is that it DOES work with the previous fossil
version (1.18) and does NOT work with 1.19 - so obviously _something_
changed in fossil itself.
Thanks
Emil
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at
Hi
This is fossil version 1.19 [6517b5c857] 2011-09-01 18:25:19 UTC
on Windows 7 SP1
fossil add *
D:\utils\programs\fossil.exe: file not found D:/TEMP/proj/*
Files are of course there, but it seems the wrong path separator is used (/).
The same works OK with
This is fossil version 1.18 [df9da91ba
Hello
This is fossil version [b48f78964e] 2010-09-18 15:51:43 UTC
on Windows XP SP3
When I create a patch file using
fossil diff > patch.txt
the resulting file cannot be used for patching. It seems there is an
extra 0D line separator (0d 0d 0a) for the actual source lines. (---,
+++, @@ lines ar
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Clark Christensen
> To: fossil-us...@lists.fossil-scm.org
> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:36:43 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: [fossil-users] Path Separators
> I'm using Fossil on MS Windows under the TCC/4NT shell, and am mostly really
> happy with it. But
Hi
This is fossil version [d5695157d0] 2009-11-11 16:21:19 UTC
[D:\Works\xa-db]fossil revert reporting.sql
revert file 'reporting.sql'? this will destroy local changes [y/N]? y
D:\PROGRAMS\UTILS\FOSSIL.EXE: no history for file: reporting.sql
[D:\Works\xa-db]fossil revert reporting.SQL
revert file
Hi
I am just starting to explore this nice piece of software. I like it
very much for now, however I encountered a strange behavior - I really
think it is a bug.
I am using Windows XP and JPSoftware's TCC as a replacement for the
command-line shell. By default it is installed in C:\Program
Files\J
13 matches
Mail list logo
