[fossil-users] Fossil release pending.

2011-02-07 Thread Richard Hipp
I haven't done an official build of Fossil on a long while.  So I'll try to
do one on Wednesday.  Please let me know if you see any serious problems
with the current tip of trunk.

Note that I am unable to reproduce the sync problem reported in
http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/info/fbea61caf0 despite considerable
effort.

The release checklist is at
http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/test/release-checklist.wiki

-- 
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] Fossil release pending.

2011-02-07 Thread Nolan Darilek
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Have you had any luck duplicating the failure to clone configuration
from some repositories? That seems like a fairly large regression to me,
as it means that some clones will lack a number of very basic
characteristics of their parent projects.

Thanks.

On 02/07/2011 04:55 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
 I haven't done an official build of Fossil on a long while.  So I'll try to
 do one on Wednesday.  Please let me know if you see any serious problems
 with the current tip of trunk.
 
 Note that I am unable to reproduce the sync problem reported in
 http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/info/fbea61caf0 despite considerable
 effort.
 
 The release checklist is at
 http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/test/release-checklist.wiki
 
 
 
 
 ___
 fossil-users mailing list
 fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
 http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk1QgNIACgkQIaMjFWMehWKsDQCdH7yiWCXSEwomdeQBtO8g07Q8
3MMAnik3pxVkptHNjI4u6yVWvn7KeDLS
=lFdE
-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] Fossil release pending.

2011-02-07 Thread Richard Hipp
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Nolan Darilek no...@thewordnerd.infowrote:

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA1

 Have you had any luck duplicating the failure to clone configuration
 from some repositories? That seems like a fairly large regression to me,
 as it means that some clones will lack a number of very basic
 characteristics of their parent projects.


I haven't even tried, in as much as you said that it works with the Fossil
self-hosting repository.


 Thanks.

 On 02/07/2011 04:55 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
  I haven't done an official build of Fossil on a long while.  So I'll try
 to
  do one on Wednesday.  Please let me know if you see any serious problems
  with the current tip of trunk.
 
  Note that I am unable to reproduce the sync problem reported in
  http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/info/fbea61caf0 despite considerable
  effort.
 
  The release checklist is at
  http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/test/release-checklist.wiki
 
 
 
 
  ___
  fossil-users mailing list
  fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
  http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
 Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

 iEYEARECAAYFAk1QgNIACgkQIaMjFWMehWKsDQCdH7yiWCXSEwomdeQBtO8g07Q8
 3MMAnik3pxVkptHNjI4u6yVWvn7KeDLS
 =lFdE
 -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




-- 
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] Fossil release pending.

2011-02-07 Thread Lluís Batlle i Rossell
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 05:55:08PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
 I haven't done an official build of Fossil on a long while.  So I'll try to
 do one on Wednesday.  Please let me know if you see any serious problems
 with the current tip of trunk.
 
 Note that I am unable to reproduce the sync problem reported in
 http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/info/fbea61caf0 despite considerable
 effort.

Hello,

it's me reporting this problem. We experience this in all our machines,
which use fossil versions all from this year.

We did not see any of this until we enabled the delta manifests, around
december. We do not commit baseline manifests at will; it is fossil thinking it
is time to do so.

We use mostly linux x86_64, and also some cygwin fossil windows builds, at a
commit rate of around 10 commits per day, with quite enough files:
$ fossil ls | wc -l
2930

All coworkers experenienced this, all synchronising against a fossil served by
cgi. The fossil server is not that new; maybe it dates from late november. Does
it matter?
It looks like all fossil 'clients' get always the changes on sync, but they are
not considered in the checkin DAG. Only after 'rebuild' they become part of the
DAG.

Tomorrow I can try to reproduce this in a new repository.

Who is here using delta manifests in their repositories? Anyone else? I know
fossil-scm.org does not use delta manifests.

Regards,
Lluís.
___
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] Fossil release pending.

2011-02-07 Thread Lluís Batlle i Rossell
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 05:55:08PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
 I haven't done an official build of Fossil on a long while.  So I'll try to
 do one on Wednesday.  Please let me know if you see any serious problems
 with the current tip of trunk.

I also hit troubles here, under reports claimed to be by 'viric'
http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/tktview/115e95ac11631d0f3f2cf2427f1a7212999b079e

If this triggers some interest...
I did not manage to understand why it fails, although I investigated a bit.

Thank you,
Lluís.
___
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] Fossil release pending.

2011-02-07 Thread Lluís Batlle i Rossell
Hello Richard,

On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 07:02:26PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
 2011/2/7 Lluís Batlle i Rossell virik...@gmail.com
 
  On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 05:55:08PM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote:
   I haven't done an official build of Fossil on a long while.  So I'll try
  to
   do one on Wednesday.  Please let me know if you see any serious problems
   with the current tip of trunk.
  
   Note that I am unable to reproduce the sync problem reported in
   http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/info/fbea61caf0 despite considerable
   effort.
 
  Hello,
 
  it's me reporting this problem. We experience this in all our machines,
  which use fossil versions all from this year.
 
  We did not see any of this until we enabled the delta manifests, around
  december. We do not commit baseline manifests at will; it is fossil
  thinking it
  is time to do so.
 
  We use mostly linux x86_64, and also some cygwin fossil windows builds, at
  a
  commit rate of around 10 commits per day, with quite enough files:
  $ fossil ls | wc -l
  2930
 
  All coworkers experenienced this, all synchronising against a fossil served
  by
  cgi. The fossil server is not that new; maybe it dates from late november.
  Does
  it matter?
 
 
 Yes.  Older Fossils don't know how to deal with delta manifests.  (On the
 other hand, delta manifests should never be created unless you explicitly
 ask for them at least once.  Once at least one delta-manifest is in the
 respository, Fossil will feel free to create more, but it will never create
 the first one without being asked.)

I know. We introduced the first delta manifest on December, and we work with
deltas since then in all workstations (around 10 workstations, 5 users).

 
 So if you have asked for a delta-manifest, please update all Fossil binaries
 to the latest.  Please let me know if this does not fix the problem.

All fossil versions we use are aware of delta manifests, even that running as
CGI. Simply the CGI is older than the versions we use in the workstations.

In fact, the CGI has *never* shown any problem like that of not going beyond
new baseline manifests. So it goes like this:

Workstation A:
- Adds some delta manifests, autosynching with the CGI
- At some points, adds a baseline manifest (B1, let's name), autosynching.
- Adds more delta manifests, autosynching.

Server (CGI, running fossil 2011-01-01, aware of deltas):
- It always shows proper branches in the timeline, although there we don't have
  any opened repository.

Workstation B or any other (latest fossil version):
- Autosynhing from the CGI, it interchanges all artifacts.
- Running fossil update trunk, or looking at the timeline, the last baseline
checkin (B1) is the last shown, or the last updated to. Committing anything and
autosynching, creates a new leaf on trunk (seen in the CGI), although it thinks
it has only one leaf.
- fossil rebuild puts the timeline shown as the server, brings in the double
  leaf, and all delta manifests that were 'hidden' until that moment.

If it is Workstation B commiting the baseline manifest, then all others (A, C,
...) experience the same problem, and we need a 'rebuild in them'. The server
always shows properly the last state with all deltas taken into account. This
happens with every baseline checkin. We noticed the first baseline checkin
(after introducing deltas) at the beginning of January.

I forgot to mention this CGI server working properly, in previous letters. And I
said it was from late november; bad memory. The server is from 2011-01-01,
i686-linux.

I understand this is hard to track... I would send you a '.fossil' file of a
repository in 'that state', but we are managing closed source. Can you suggest
at what sqlite tables I should look at? I don't have all the workstations at the
'last checkin' right now, so I imagine I can find one with needs a rebuild.

I agree the error looks hard to find.

Thank you,
Lluís.

  It looks like all fossil 'clients' get always the changes on sync, but they
  are
  not considered in the checkin DAG. Only after 'rebuild' they become part of
  the
  DAG.
 
  Tomorrow I can try to reproduce this in a new repository.
 
  Who is here using delta manifests in their repositories? Anyone else? I
  know
  fossil-scm.org does not use delta manifests.
 
  Regards,
  Lluís.
  ___
  fossil-users mailing list
  fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
  http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 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