Re: [fossil-users] disabled due to excessive bounces (again?)

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 2:32 AM, K. Fossil user wrote: > Of course he would tell everyone that Fossil is a very bad Team with a very > bad product. And you are free to get another DVCS of your choice. Go get trolling somewhere else. Luca ___ fossil-use

Re: [fossil-users] on sha1 as a hash

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Aldo Nicolas Bruno wrote: > Better question can be, how fossil manage collisions? Just a side note: according to v1.31 the repository can now show its own collisions, as in

Re: [fossil-users] Why we should NEVER use inetd/xinetd

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:35 AM, K. Fossil user wrote: > a) I don't talk about Fossil. My talk is about inetd/xinetd issue when it > comes to security. Oh, I thought we were on fossil-users here... > You really want to know what an expert in computers security said to us ? > "Never use xinetd or

Re: [fossil-users] Why we should NEVER use inetd/xinetd

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 1:02 AM, K. Fossil user wrote: > For example, today I've learned that Luca is not aware about security like > 90% of Windows normal users... And still you don't learn what to ask on the right mailing list. Stop trolling. ___ foss

Re: [fossil-users] Why we should NEVER use inetd/xinetd

Allow me to elaborate a little more, hope this will make you stop posting like in the previous days. On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:30 AM, K. Fossil user wrote: > a) I have nothing to ask at this time, so I don't even need to learn how to > [ask] > b) Someone who have somethin

Re: [fossil-users] Why we should NEVER use inetd/xinetd

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 3:42 AM, K. Fossil user wrote: > Hi, > >> « » > > I don't click in any links that are not known... Right approach! After all, all computer people have never heard about Bike Shed...especially those tied to FreeBSD... You have to learn a lot of stuff.

Re: [fossil-users] Download v1.36 Linux x86 tar.gz actually contains 64bit binary

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:16 PM, K. Fossil user wrote: > Beyond that, I don't understand why SQlite is not 3.15.1 ... Seems to me that SQLite 3.15.1 was released on november the 4th, while fossil 1.36 was compiled on october the 24th. Anyway, I cannot find checksums for 1.36 here

Re: [fossil-users] Download v1.36 Linux x86 tar.gz actually contains 64bit binary

On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 1:24 AM, K. Fossil user wrote: > Explain me why a SO serious project could not wait for 10 days or if it is > not that possible (I don't see why ??), why don't Fossil create a 1.36.1? Sorry pal, my guess is that the latest sqlite3 was not required by fossil 1.36, in other

Re: [fossil-users] private branches

On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:47 AM, Scott Doctor wrote: > I am confuzzled. Seems the private branch becomes public by folding into the > public branch. Not really: the private branch (commits) has to be merged into a public branch, therefore each commit of the private branch gets its way into a publ

Re: [fossil-users] Using Fossil SCM with Master Repositories held on a Flash Drive ?

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Martin Irvine wrote: > A possible additional complicating factor in the “right” way to do all this > is that typically, when I finish working at a PC I often will not want to > leave a copy of the source code or the repository on the PC (i.e., on a > customer’s ha

Re: [fossil-users] Using Fossil SCM with Master Repositories held on aFlash Drive ?

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:25 AM, Martin Irvine wrote: > “Temporarily” means I will usually not want to leave a > copy of the source code or the repository on the PC when I am finished Sorry, but this sounds not good to me. Either you don't trust your clients or you are carrying on any kind of s

[fossil-users] advice on managing language specific branches

Hi all, this could sound trivial, but so far I developed on the same language versione (e.g., php 5) and all my branches were feature branches. So far so good. Now I have to maintain the same application on two different language versions, php 5 and 7. I created a LANG_5 and LANG_7 branch and work

[fossil-users] two questions abut git import

Hi all, I'm new to fossil, therefore apologize for my trivial questions. I've imported a quite big git repository (around 500 GB) to fossil without any problem, but: 1) if I get it right the fossil repo file must be in the same directory of the git tree, and therefore I cannot place it somewhere el

Re: [fossil-users] two questions abut git import

Ciao, On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Baruch Burstein wrote: > No. The Fossil repo is completely self contained and does not depend in any > way on the git repo or even on the git-export file it was created from. > I've moved the fossil repository file to a location where I'd like to keep all

Re: [fossil-users] two questions abut git import

Ciao, On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > When you move a repo you need to close/re-open it again because its location > is stored in the checkout db. thanks! I didn't know that. Luca ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.

Re: [fossil-users] FLOSS interview

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Scott Robison wrote: > Just watched the interview at http://twit.tv/show/floss-weekly/320 ... good > job! I can't believe DRH didn't drop my name, but I'll forgive him this > time. {snicker} Partly unrelated, and quite old, but there's another interesting interview

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:36 AM, Warren Young wrote: > On Mar 12, 2015, at 7:47 PM, jungle Boogie wrote: >> >> Hopefully some converts will check out the Fossil project. > > Unlikely. They’re offering an automated migration path to GitHub: > > https://code.google.com/export-to-github/ Should

Re: [fossil-users] Google code shutting down

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Jan Danielsson wrote: > On 13/03/15 20:55, Richard Hipp wrote: >>> Few organizations have the problem that the full power of Git solves. >> And yet many organizations voluntarily take on the problems that come >> with using Git. Weird. > >One shouldn't underes

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 2:11 AM, die.drachen wrote: > >> Further questions about staging area: >> >> If I do this: >> >> (1) Edit file xyzzy.txt >> (2) git add xyzzy.txt >> (3) More edits to xyzzy.txt >> (4) git commit >> >> Then does only the first set of edits to xyzzy.txt ge

Re: [fossil-users] Is this a crazy idea?

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Abilio Marques wrote: > To put it back again in better words, the idea is to make an adaptor that > let's existing apps (mostly IDEs) to use Fossil as another version control > system, until they get a native plugin, but via using the existing GIT tool > interface

Re: [fossil-users] Select specific changes within files

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > I agree with Stephan, except to note that some repositories do not > store code. If you are checking in changes to text documentation, > then maybe testing is not as important and a partial commit would be > ok. > I believe it can be evil ev

[fossil-users] questions about tickets

Hi all, I'm just curious to know if there is a way to list open tickets from the command line, that would be useful for instance to see the ticket id to place in a commit message without using the ui. I don't believe the timeline is appropriate for this since it will all tickets, not only open ones

[fossil-users] problem migrating from git

Hi all, today I tried to migrate one of my git repository to fossil, but I'm getting a disk full error that is unlikely to happen. % git fast-export --all | fossil import --git /sviluppo/fossil/myrepo.fossil Rebuilding repository meta-data... 100.0% complete... Vacuuming... SQLITE_FULL: statemen

Re: [fossil-users] problem migrating from git

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > It's TMPDIR. Or use SQLITE_TMPDIR as an alternative. Either will work. Confirm it worked on either the older version and the current version. Thanks, Luca ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-use

Re: [fossil-users] questions about tickets

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Ron W wrote: > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Luca Ferrari wrote: > Briefly, you need to define a report (in the UI's ticket page) to show open > tickets, then you can run that report from the CLI. For example "fossil > ticket show OpenTi

[fossil-users] how to move commits to a different branch

Hi all, I tried to move commits to another thread using tags but I was unable to do it: fossil tag add --propagate mybranch 455802dfc6 fossil tag cancel trunk 455802dfc6 but the timeline always shows me the commits as being in trunk. I've managed to do this using the web interface, making the abo

[fossil-users] imported from git: a question about performances and about tags

Hi all, so at last I got my git repo imported into fossil, the size of the fossil repo is 813MB and has 1386 checkins. I've done the first commits and I've seen it takes up to 30 seconds to complete the action, and this seems to me a pretty high time. Please note I'm not criticizing fossil, I'm jus

Re: [fossil-users] imported from git: a question about performances and about tags

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > How many files are in a single check-out. > The working directory is made by 39k files, but around 3k are in the repository (the others are blobs and not versioned files). > Please send us the output of "fossil dbstat" Here it is: % fossil

Re: [fossil-users] imported from git: a question about performances and about tags

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Luca Ferrari wrote: > On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: >> How many files are in a single check-out. >> > > The working directory is made by 39k files, but around 3k are in the > repository (the others are blobs and n

Re: [fossil-users] imported from git: a question about performances and about tags

In the meantime I've tried to rebuild the repository: % fossil rebuild /sviluppo/fossil/myrepo.fossil --analyze --vacuum but it seems to me things are going worst: % time fossil commit -m "..." # 1 file New_Version: 0001bcb31d7a9a982f8558e22e897afc648ee5ff fossil commit -m 24,43s user 6,36s sy

Re: [fossil-users] imported from git: a question about performances and about tags

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > How long does this take: > > fossil commit --dryrun -f -m 'not a real commit' > Here it is: fossil commit --dry-run -f -m 'not a real commit' 24,79s user 6,26s system 63% cpu 48,602 total > What if you first do: > >fossil setting m

[fossil-users] timezone and tags from git import

Hi all, I've another couple of questions: the first is that I noted that the timeline is reporting time in UTC, while my computer is using TZ='Europe/Rome'. I suspect this depends on the sqlite configuration, but I don't know how to set it up right. The second question, that has been forgiven in a

Re: [fossil-users] how to move commits to a different branch

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Ron W wrote: > As I understand it, you need to add 2 tags: "branch=mybranch" and > "sym-mybranch" Uhm..I've done a few experiments and apparently the following is not having any effect: % fossil tag add 'branch' 53c9207df8 ramo % fossil tag cancel sym-trunk 53c92

Re: [fossil-users] how to move commits to a different branch

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > Use the web interface. Visit the page that describes the check-in you > want to move and click on the "edit" link. Then select "Make this > check-in the start of a new branch named" and enter the new branch > name. Then press "Apply Changes

Re: [fossil-users] how to move commits to a different branch

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Andy Bradford wrote: > fossil edit UUID ?OPTIONS? I'll second that! But if I could say, the option "newbranch" does not look good at me, since it a little too long. Coming from git I'm used to a short command line, while fossil tend to be quite verbose commands. B

[fossil-users] [OT] command line help and question marks for oprtional arguments

Hello, one thing that puzzles me every time I do fossil help is the presence of question marks for oprtional parameters, as in % fossil help commit Usage: fossil commit ?OPTIONS? ?FILE...? while I would expect it to be like % fossil help commit Usage: fossil commit [OPTIONS] [FILE...] Now, if

[fossil-users] fossil reports no changes after editing files?

Hi, this happened twice today: I edited a bunch of file and tried to commit but fossil reports no changes were made and I have to create an --allow-empty commit. I'm running fossil version 1.32 [6c40678e91] 2015-03-14 13:20:34 UTC, the repo-cksum is off. Could it be the cause of this problem? T

Re: [fossil-users] fossil reports no changes after editing files?

On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > With mtime-changes off, Fossil computes a SHA1 checksum on every file > in the repository when it checks for changes. That can be slow for a > large repo, but it won't miss changes. > In fact I've disabled repo-chksum for the reason it was to

Re: [fossil-users] fossil reports no changes after editing files?

On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > > Out of curiosity, are you running under a VM? i have seen many VMs which > cannot keep a clock synched well, drifting by 10+ minutes per day, and that > "might" account for what you're seeing. Not this repository, this is running on bare met

[fossil-users] branch from current branch

Hi, this can be goofy, but is there a way to instrument fossil to create a new branch from the current one instead of having to specify it? So something like: $ fossil branch new MYBRANCH instead of $ fossil branch new MYBRANCH trunk Thanks, Luca ___

[fossil-users] forget binary files

Hi, this may sound stupid, but once I've mistakenly committed binary files, is there a way to remove them from the repository at all? My attempt is (i) to not version such files and (ii) reduce repository size. Thanks, Luca ___ fossil-users mailing list

Re: [fossil-users] forget binary files

On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/help?cmd=/shun > > shunning is the only way to remove something and should be considered a > "last resort" option. > Thanks, but not quite what I was searching for: I need to remove a full tree of files, s

Re: [fossil-users] forget binary files

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Andy Goth wrote: > On 8/4/2015 6:06 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:02 PM, David Mason > > wrote: >>> Just be careful not to shun 0 length files or you won't be able to >>> commit a 0-length file until you've cleared the

Re: [fossil-users] fossil reports no changes after editing files?

On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Luca Ferrari wrote: > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: >> if you run across a case where Fossil is not detecting an edit. The >> --sha1sum option causes it to do a full SHA1 checksum on all files, >> just that once. >

Re: [fossil-users] fossil reports no changes after editing files?

On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: > @Luca: protocollazione.inc.php is in the current directory of your > repository and checked in, right? What does: > > fossil ls | grep protocollazione.inc.php > > say? Now it says: % fossil ls | grep protocollazione.inc.php edilweb/protocolla

[fossil-users] why merge does not prompt for commit?

Hi all, this could sound trivial, but why the merge (especially with --integrate) does not prompt immediately for a commit? What is the rationale of having merge and commit as separate actions when closing branches? The only one that comes into my mind is for aborting, is that correct? Thanks, Luc

Re: [fossil-users] why merge does not prompt for commit?

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > > Committing without first checking whether the commit was _semantically_ > successful is _just plain wrong_. git does it that way, but that is a huge > flaw in its thinking (IMHO). A successful merge only means that the SCM was > capable of m

Re: [fossil-users] Why Hash

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Scott Doctor wrote: > > Why does Fossil use a hash for an entries identity instead of sequential > numbering? Seems simply using the rowid of the associated database table > would be more meaningful and practical than those long strings of arbitrary > numbers. > S

[fossil-users] merge conflict: a doubt

Hi all, today I merged from trunk into a branch of my project and got a conflict on a file: % fossil status .. CONFLICT classes/PraticaBase.php EDITED classes/ProtocolloInfoStruct.php MERGED_WITH cdbb6ceba8fdb2b51410b76af7ce5b86b691e8a9 So I edited the conflicting file and resolved manually

Re: [fossil-users] merge conflict: a doubt

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 3/2/16, Luca Ferrari wrote: >> >> % fossil commit >> possible unresolved merge conflict in ./classes/PraticaBase.php >> abort due to unresolved merge conflicts; use --allow-conflict to override >&g

Re: [fossil-users] merge conflict: a doubt

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 12:11 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: > Please update if at all possible. 1.33 is almost a year old, and the past 12 > months have seen lots of activity: Yes, I'm updating. > My currently hypotheses is that you perhaps had an editor session active, > but unsaved, for one of the co

[fossil-users] viewin a past commit

Hi all, sorry if this is trivial, but once I've found a checkin in the timeline (e.g., via search) how can I inspect it to see which files and which lines have been changed? Something like the "git show" command. I've already tried info and whatis but is not what I'm looking for. Thanks, Luca

Re: [fossil-users] viewin a past commit

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > The timeline has a "with files" option in the drop-down list at the top - > simply select it after the search results are shown. From the CLI you can > use the -v (verbose) flag to show them. So the solution would be something like fossil ti

Re: [fossil-users] viewin a past commit

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: >> fossil time -v -n 1 >> >> Any chance I can get also the diff appended to the output? >> > > fossil diff --from --to Of course, but this means I have to do two commands: time to see modified files and diff to see differences. I'm not goin

[fossil-users] multiple open leaf on closed branches?

Hi all, I suspect I did not get right the multiple open leaf warning: % fossil stat ... checkout: fc75337a991c9a1156735b1eca3f9cdd0d2ca70f 2016-05-30 15:25:09 UTC parent: e7c2399f591e36e1ec947dfb7b034b2c02697b4b 2016-05-30 12:37:08 UTC tags: trunk ... WARNING: multiple open leaf

Re: [fossil-users] multiple open leaf on closed branches?

On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: >> Maybe the LEAF table in the database file is somehow out of sync. >> Have you tried running "fossil rebuild" to see if that clears the >> problem? > > Or the more light-weight "fossil leaves --recompute" for starters. Nope! I've done:

Re: [fossil-users] multiple open leaf on closed branches?

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Luca Ferrari wrote: > WARNING: multiple open leaf check-ins on trunk: > (1) 2016-05-30 15:25:09 [fc75337a99] (current) > (2) 2015-11-19 14:08:50 [aa9521ccd9] > (3) 2015-08-26 08:18:19 [c413c4592a] I've tried to inspect one of the open leaf:

Re: [fossil-users] multiple open leaf on closed branches?

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 01:50:01PM +0200, Luca Ferrari wrote: >> So the branch 'feature-installazioni' is closed, and is merged. >> I'm a little confused. > > A merge doesn't automatically close

Re: [fossil-users] multiple open leaf on closed branches?

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Luca Ferrari wrote: > The commit is marked as merged and the branch is shown in the closed > list, am I missing something? > What could happen if I try to reclose the open leaves? Anyone has an idea of what is fossil telling me? Just for clarity: this

Re: [fossil-users] multiple open leaf on closed branches?

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > No. Can you make the repo available for analysis? > Sorry, my employer does not grant me to do it. Is there anything I can export that can be useful? The repo is actually 800+MB. In the meantime I've tried the desperate trick: % fossil mer