Re: [fossil-users] email testing - no subscriber table?

Le 26/06/2018 à 09:25, j. van den hoff a écrit : On Mon, 25 Jun 2018 23:57:35 +0200, jungle Boogie wrote: On 25 June 2018 at 14:51, Richard Hipp wrote: On 6/25/18, jungle Boogie wrote: If I inadvertently forward my email along to someone/group without modifying the footer, the

Re: [fossil-users] email testing - no subscriber table?

Le 23/06/2018 à 22:07, Richard Hipp a écrit : Just FYI: I have opened up email notifications on the canonical Fossil repository. To subscribe, visit: https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/subscribe Your help in finding creative ways of breaking the new system is appreciated. Please note that

Re: [fossil-users] Perception of Fossil

Le 16/06/2018 à 17:05, Eduardo Morras a écrit : I partially disagree. If you allow anonymous people to pull / commit / merge data to your 'central repository', you can get easily spammed. If I pull-request 100 images of 10MB your system will go down. Multiply it by several 'funny guys' on more

Re: [fossil-users] Perception of Fossil

Le 15/06/2018 à 22:55, John Found a écrit : On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 16:44:55 -0400 Richard Hipp wrote: Other ideas for what to name this (hypothetical and unimplemented) command: fossil contribute fossil bequest fossil bestow fossil proffer fossil propose fossil

Re: [fossil-users] Perception of Fossil

It looks good to me. Actually, implementation details doesn’t really matter as long as it’s easy to contributors to push a “pull-request” (however we call it), easy for admins to check it (being able to do it also via the UI would be very nice) and accept or refuse it, and if it doesn’t make

Re: [fossil-users] Perception of Fossil

Le 15/06/2018 à 01:32, Chad Perrin a écrit : On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:59:12PM +0100, Thomas wrote: Pull requests are not supported, hence the software can't be used for community driven open source. The pull request interface on GitHub is a feature of GitHub, not of Git. While it would be

Re: [fossil-users] Stress testing www4... (was Re: [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 23/12/2017 à 02:14, Richard Hipp a écrit : I did a half-baked idle timer in the latest check-in, using the --max-latency option. fossil server --max-latency 30 I cloned the Fossil repo, built the new version and also relaunch Fossil with: nohub fossil server --max-latency 30 & Is

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 22/12/2017 à 21:34, Richard Hipp a écrit : On 12/22/17, Olivier R. <m...@grammalecte.net> wrote: I also run Fossil on a cheap VPS. https://www.scaleway.com/virtual-cloud-servers/ (The starter version at €2.99/month) I'm building up a new Fossil server on this VPS now - on an AR

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 22/12/2017 à 22:39, Richard Hipp a écrit : On 12/22/17, Olivier R. <m...@grammalecte.net> wrote: I also run Fossil on a cheap VPS. Maybe you have used up your bandwidth quota and the ISP is throttling your connection? There is no bandwidth quota. And when I kill the pro

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 22/12/2017 à 18:41, Warren Young a écrit : I’ve added the user to the “wireshark” group, but it doesn’t work. You have to log out and back in before group changes will take effect. That’s what I did. But it didn’t work. So I used `lsof -i:8080` again. Here is the difference with the

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 22/12/2017 à 19:57, Warren Young a écrit : On Dec 22, 2017, at 9:03 AM, Warren Young wrote: Olivier, what about memory usage for the Fossil processes? “top” can give you this. I just checked my public server, and each of the 4 Fossil instances is taking about 20 MB

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 22/12/2017 à 16:10, Warren Young a écrit : 1. Your repo is public-facing. Is this a reasonable number of clients to be connected at any given time to this repo? It seems high to me, given the transient nature of most Fossil connections. Only two devs have the right to modify the online

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 22/12/2017 à 15:59, Richard Hipp a écrit : On 12/22/17, Olivier R. <m...@grammalecte.net> wrote: There is now more than 24 subprocesses of Fossil running, and it’s getting really slow. Are you saying that these 24 Fossils are spinning - using CPU cycles - not just hung waiting

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 19/12/2017 à 21:49, Warren Young a écrit : If it’s a sign of a bug, then it means something very bad has happened, like the network stack has lost track of its client somehow. To see that, you’d need to do a network capture on that fossil instance’s network sockets. Use netstat -nap or

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 19/12/2017 à 02:00, Warren Young a écrit : On Dec 18, 2017, at 6:52 AM, Olivier R. <m...@grammalecte.net> wrote: When gdb was active, Fossil didn’t answer when asking for a webpage. It seemed blocked. That’s exactly what happens. If you want the process to run while GDB remains at

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

OK. It happened again while I was away for few days. The main process has created 10 subprocesses. Fossil was very slow. I used gdb on the main process. When gdb was active, Fossil didn’t answer when asking for a webpage. It seemed blocked. And Fossil was responsive again few seconds after I

Re: [fossil-users] Trolling GitHub for ideas

Le 25/11/2017 à 15:17, Richard Hipp a écrit : Your suggestions for useful features found in GitHub but missing from Fossil, or for pages in GitHub that work especially well and that you would like to see replicated in Fossil, are greatly appreciated. Applying a patch/diff from someone who has

Re: [fossil-users] Interface improvement ideas from GitHub

Le 25/11/2017 à 14:53, Richard Hipp a écrit : I notice on diff pages of GitHub (ex: https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite/commit/028307ebcc953ee944d389fe359d146ab4893d16) that above and below each diff chunk there is a light-blue block on the left with an icon in the middle. If you hover over this

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 06/11/2017 à 18:19, Warren Young a écrit : The remaining PIDs are all certainly a single parent with multiple children. You’d have to run top in “tree” mode or show the PPID column to find out which one is the parent. You can tell without doing that by the fact that all of the VIRT column

Re: [fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Le 03/11/2017 à 10:22, Richard Hipp a écrit : On 11/3/17, Olivier R. <m...@grammalecte.net> wrote: And today, Fossil was already very slow and I discovered that there were more than ten processes of Fossil running. Can you compile with symbols enabled ("-g") and th

[fossil-users] [Bug?] [server] Processes of Fossil popping up unexpectedly

Hi everyone, There is a fossil repo I run on a server since several months. And I noticed several times a behavior I don’t understand at all. After few months of running sweetly, I noticed that the fossil server was getting slower and slower. The repo is about 120 Mb only. Then I discovered

Re: [fossil-users] Shameless self-promotion

Le 15/09/2017 à 00:40, Thomas a écrit : Fossil is a great piece of softare. Its primary strength is certainly that it is a single executable, easy to set up and easy to run as a CGI. +1 It’s surprising to see how many features there is in a such small software. The biggest disadvantage - as

Re: [fossil-users] How to move a check-in from a branch to another one?

Le 14/07/2017 à 13:55, Richard Hipp a écrit : fossil update trunk fossil merge --cherrypick $branch ... test fossil commit Thank you. Olivier ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org

[fossil-users] How to move a check-in from a branch to another one?

Hello everyone, On this page we can read: “Fossil keeps all check-ins on a single DAG. Branches are identified with tags. This means that check-ins can be freely moved between branches simply by altering their tags.” So I tried,

Re: [fossil-users] /dev/null and /dev/urandom not available ?

Thanks. Olivier Are you running the commands above as root? If so, Fossil will automatically put itself in a chroot jail on the directory containing the repository and drop root privileges before doing anything else. This is a security feature. If you are going into a chroot jail, probably

[fossil-users] /dev/null and /dev/urandom not available ?

Hello, I’m running Fossil on Debian Jessie 8.2 (x86_64-debian-jessie-2016-04-06_15:26) at Scaleway.com (VC1S). In the admin panel, Fossil says: WARNING: Device "/dev/null" is not available for reading and writing. WARNING: Device "/dev/urandom" is not available for reading. This means

[fossil-users] [Feature-request] Unversioned files: unpack

Hello, It would be very useful if the repository could remember the folder of the unversioned files when we add them. Doing so, we could unpack all unversioned files with a simple command like: fossil uv unpack If a folder doesn’t exist anymore, we could recreate it with the option -f