[fossil-users] Openssl 1.1.0 [Was:Objections to merging stash-fixes branch?]

2016-09-08 Thread Jan Nijtmans
2016-09-08 5:00 GMT+02:00 Joe Mistachkin: > I think the MSVC makefile needs updating for the OpenSSL 1.1.0 changes > to work. I think it should work fine after my changes, but feel free to fix anything I screwed up ;-) > Also, maybe we should wait for 1.1.0 to mature a bit prior > to migrating

Re: [fossil-users] Objections to merging stash-fixes branch?

2016-09-08 Thread Andy Bradford
Thus said "Joe Mistachkin" on Wed, 07 Sep 2016 20:00:03 -0700: > FYI, I've modified your branch to re-merge changes from trunk without > the changes for OpenSSL 1.1.0, which is not quite ready for primetime > yet. Thanks for the heads up. The nice thing about Fossil is that it makes this

[fossil-users] Double forward slash when using --baseurl

2016-09-08 Thread Zombies
Hi all, I'm trying to set up a fossil server behind a loadbalancer, and so am using the --baseurl option to fossil server. For the main web page links it is working fine, however on some of the pages, I am getting links to pages with an extra '/' being inserted. It happens with all of the links

Re: [fossil-users] Infinite loop on merge

2016-09-08 Thread Jan Nijtmans
2016-09-08 1:32 GMT+02:00 Ross Berteig: > So my testing does not block releasing 1.35.1. > > I have no strong opinion about whether such an update is required, but the > most recent regression does seem like it causes real problems if tripped > over. I agree, but it's not up to me to decide.

Re: [fossil-users] Double forward slash when using --baseurl

2016-09-08 Thread Joe Mistachkin
Zombies wrote: > > For the main web page links it is working fine, however on some of the pages, > I am getting links to pages with an extra '/' being inserted. It happens with > all of the links from the 'Admin' tab, e.g- > What is the full command line being used? -- Joe Mistachkin @

Re: [fossil-users] Openssl 1.1.0 [Was:Objections to merging stash-fixes branch?]

2016-09-08 Thread Joe Mistachkin
Jan Nijtmans wrote: > > That's your decision (or .. actually Richard's ???) > In my view, openssl-1.1.0 has a larger user base > than SQLite 1.15, so it should be OK for fossil > trunk. I didn't find anything wrong with it so far. > (I wouldn't recommend it - yet - as default > for the 1.35