Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

Thus said "dewey.hyl...@gmail.com" on Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:40:36 -0500: > * fossil does serve both a repo file and a directory if these files > are copied to a different local directory. Unless things have changed, it is generally not recommended to run Fossil on a non-local filesystem.

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

This is something I've not thought of - and I think this is how the fossil source itself is propagated to its official mirrors. I don't know why this didn't occur to me, unless it is simply an instance of: "When you are a hammer, everything is a nail." And I've been looking at container-based

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On Dec 21, 2017, at 1:00 PM, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: > > That's where the NAS and sshfs came into play. You seem to be trying to use containers and such to provide distributed service, but Fossil already does that: it’s a DVCS. There’s no one telling you it must live in only one place.

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On 12/21/17, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: > 1268vfile_scan(, blob_size(), 0, 0, 0); > (gdb) n You need to step into vfile_scan() (using "s" instead of "n") because that is where all the interesting stuff happens. There is a loop inside vfile_scan() that uses

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

Ugh, that is bad news. I was interested in the ssh method for ease of use as well as its encrypted communications ... I suppose nfs is another possibility, but I'm not a fan for several reasons. And maybe iscsi, if Here is what I'm currently attempting to accomplish: We have redundant storage

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

New host: CentOS 7 Running directly on the host, with repositories over sshfs as before: ranch2@10.1.51.120:fossils on /fossils type fuse.sshfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0) I'm not a C dev, so I'm largely unfamiliar with this type of debugging; let me know if I need to handle

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On Dec 21, 2017, at 11:40 AM, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: > > ranch2@10.1.51.120:fossils on /fossils type fuse.sshfs > (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0) Running SQLite — upon which Fossil is based — over sshfs is a bad idea. The current implementation doesn’t even try to

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

Unfortunately, my first stab at this failed: (gdb) break repo_list_page Breakpoint 1 at 0x7ccc0: file ./src/main.c, line 1238. (gdb) run http --repolist /fossils On 12/20/17, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: >> Would someone help me understand what I'm seeing here? I expect

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On Dec 20, 2017, at 10:24 PM, Andy Bradford wrote: > > Thus said Warren Young on Wed, 20 Dec 2017 21:02:01 -0700: > >> Linux containers aren't foolproof when it comes to permission >> isolation. Better to not let Fossil have root privs even inside a >>

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

Thus said Dewey Hylton on Wed, 20 Dec 2017 20:23:23 -0500: > All users have read/write permissions on those files, so this doesn't > make sense (to me) from a Unix permissions standpoint. As Warren asked, what are the permissions on the directory that contains the Fossils? Not only does

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

Thus said Warren Young on Wed, 20 Dec 2017 21:02:01 -0700: > Linux containers aren't foolproof when it comes to permission > isolation. Better to not let Fossil have root privs even inside a > container. Fossil does chroot first and then drop root privileges which then

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On Dec 20, 2017, at 6:23 PM, Dewey Hylton wrote: > > All users have read/write permissions on those files, so this doesn’t make > sense (to me) from a Unix permissions standpoint. Fine, but what about the directory that holds these files? That’s why I applied the

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On 12/20/17, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: > Would someone help me understand what I'm seeing here? I expect a list of > repositories > in the web page output, but am told there are none. I don't understand it either. To debug, recompile Fossil with -g and -O0. Create a

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

Oh, and THANK YOU for responding. > On Dec 20, 2017, at 5:54 PM, Warren Young wrote: > >> On Dec 20, 2017, at 3:40 PM, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> # ls -lh /fossils|grep fossil >> -rw-rw-rw-1 1000 root 272.0K Dec 19 14:37 archsetup.fossil >> -rw-rw-rw-

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

All users have read/write permissions on those files, so this doesn’t make sense (to me) from a Unix permissions standpoint. I am indeed a BSD guy, but ... in reality fossil is running in a docker container on a Linux server and accessing the files via sshfs mount. I can futz about and make

Re: [fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

On Dec 20, 2017, at 3:40 PM, dewey.hyl...@gmail.com wrote: > > # ls -lh /fossils|grep fossil > -rw-rw-rw-1 1000 root 272.0K Dec 19 14:37 archsetup.fossil > -rw-rw-rw-1 1000 root 224.0K Dec 19 14:36 > guac-install-script.fossil > -rw-rw-rw-1 1000 root 224.0K

[fossil-users] fossil --repolist showing no repositories

Would someone help me understand what I'm seeing here? I expect a list of repositories in the web page output, but am told there are none. I've banged on this long enough to go cross-eyed, so I hope I'm just missing something very simple. I haven't found anything in the code that would cause