Re: 207 error for ssh:// repository URIs when http:// URIs work
Chris, Gilles,
Bbased on this old discussion, is there update for this now?
is reviewbord working ok now for Mercurial repo of ssh:// repository URIs?
Jimmy
在 2011年5月20日星期五UTC+8上午12时39分01秒，Chris Toomey写道：
Thanks Gilles. We'll look at switching the repository to http then.
Chris
On May 18, 11:10 pm, Gilles Moris gilles.mo...@free.fr wrote:
AFAIK, the hg serve --stdio command does not start hgweb. It just
instruct
HG to start the wire protocol to listen on SSH stdin instead of a HTTP
socket. But the HG wire protocol has no command to retrieve a file
revision
content.
So the solution would be to either:
- Implement a new wire command to retrieve a file revision on the HG
side.
There has always been some push back for such requests, so I don't see
that
happen.
- Implement a specialized HGSSHClient class in the hg.py of the
ReviewBoard
scmtools to would run remotely run hg cat command and dump the result
over
the SSH link, instead of trying to run the HG wire protocol over SSH.
The Pros is that this would work with any mercurial version.
The drawback of this solution is that you can't protect SSH accesses
with the
hg-ssh script. You would have to use a different wrapper.
Regards.
Gilles.
On Thursday 19 May 2011 01:11:37 am Chris Toomey wrote:
Thanks Giles. When I was trying to debug it I saw that it was running
hg serve remotely on the target host over ssh, so it looked like it
should thus be able to work w/ the same hgweb interface, but that's
about where I got stuck trying to figure out why it wasn't working.
Was that some work that was started and not completed or was I
misinterpreting how it was trying to work?
Chris
On May 17, 10:27 pm, Gilles Moris gilles.mo...@free.fr wrote:
On Tuesday 17 May 2011 07:51:07 am Chris Toomey wrote:
Hi Christian,
It just has the info about the file/revision that it says it can't
find:
{stat: fail, err: {msg: The file was not found in the
repository, code: 207}, file: webapp/zend/application/
Bootstrap.php, revision: 89c64afda439}
If I cd to the repository dir. on the server (the RB server and
mercurial repository are on the same host) and execute hg cat -r
89c64afda439 webapp/zend/application/Bootstrap.php I get the
contents
of that rev. of the file, which is definitely in the repository.
And
again, it's able to access that rev. of the file when I use an
http://
repository path in RB.
Chris
The 'hg cat' command cannot operate remotely through ssh://
repositories.
It works only locally. The http:// repos in RB work around that
using the
raw file download from the hgweb interface.
So you cannot configure a HG repo with ssh:// from ReviewBoard.
You have to use local path (or NFS/SMB) or http://. It might be
possible
to use https:// as well.
Regards.
Gilles.
--
Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at
http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/
Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
reviewboard group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Status of mercurial+ssh support
I am using rb1.7.6 and ssh:// hg repo, and still found the auhentication is ok based on ssh key when create repo in reviewboard, but when i upload diff into review request, it still report as below error: the file .. (revision ) was not found in the repository. is rb still not working well on ssh:// rg repo? thanks, Jimmy 在 2011年7月14日星期四UTC+8下午5时34分26秒，morisgi写道： On Thursday 14 July 2011 01:18:33 am Mark Wang wrote: Hi all -- does Reviewboard currently support remote mercurial repos over ssh? I had read messages on this list from 2009 saying that such support didn't exist but haven't seen any updates yet about this. I tried setting up a remote hg repo via ssh (keys, etc. are all OK, and I can rbssh from the command line), and got this error. If it's supported, is there anything that might be going wrong? If hg +ssh isn't in there yet, that's fine -- just wanted to know. Thanks! Mark To my knowledge, nothing more than my reply in that post: http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard/browse_thread/thread/d2ba3808e0c8304c/4221300c55e5cd80 So still not possible. Regards. Gilles. -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Error during adding Repository to SSL enabled perforce.
Dear All, This is very critical, I am still not able to add SSL enabled perforce repository to reviewboard, Please help me. Since my machine was not having openssl 1.0.1, i need to build and install this version of openssl. I followed the instruction from document, downloaded openssl 1.0.1e ./config --prefix=/usr/local --openssldir=/usr/local/openssl zlib zlib-dynamic shared make make test make install Then i did following step Edit /etc/ld.so.conf add to paths... /usr/local/lib64 Update the run-time linker... # ldconfig verified with below command: ldd /usr/local/bin/openssl libssl.so.1.0.0 = /usr/local/lib64/libssl.so.1.0.0 (0x2b08a088c000) libcrypto.so.1.0.0 = /usr/local/lib64/libcrypto.so.1.0.0 (0x2b08a0af1000) libdl.so.2 = /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x003b2ac0) libc.so.6 = /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x003b2a40) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x003b2a00) /usr/local/bin/openssl version OpenSSL 1.0.1e 11 Feb 2013 Then I build p4python with --ssl swtich. python setup.py build --apidir /root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 --ssl /usr/local/lib64 API Release 2012.2 running build running build_py creating build creating build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7 copying P4.py - build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7 running build_ext building 'P4API' extension creating build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7 gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c P4API.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/P4API.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c PythonClientAPI.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/PythonClientAPI.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c PythonClientUser.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/PythonClientUser.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c SpecMgr.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/SpecMgr.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c P4Result.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/P4Result.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c PythonMergeData.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/PythonMergeData.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c P4MapMaker.cpp -o
Re: Problem with RBTools 0.5
I'm not on Linux, how can I get you what you want on Windows 7?
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Steven MacLeod ste...@smacleod.ca wrote:
Hi Robert,
Sorry for the delay in response, this slipped by in my inbox.
Could you please send me the output of:
$ curl http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/review-requests/44580/diffs/
-I
Basically I need to take a look at the headers being returned in the HTTP
request to RB.
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
Using RB version 1.6.3. Output of the command you requested is below:
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Bazaar repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a CVS repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a ClearCase repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Git repository...
DEBUG:root:Running: git rev-parse --git-dir
DEBUG:root:Command exited with rc 128: ['git', 'rev-parse', '--git-dir']
fatal: Not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git
---
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Mercurial repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Perforce repository...
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 info
DEBUG:root:Running: diff --version
DEBUG:root:repository info: Path: perforce-rws2.corp.good.com:3666,
Base path: None, Supports changesets: True
DEBUG:root:Making HTTP GET request to
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/
DEBUG:root:Making HTTP GET request to
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/info/
INFO:root:Generating diff for changenum 303396
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 describe -s 303396
DEBUG:root:Processing delete of
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln
DEBUG:root:Writing
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln#4 to
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 print -o
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra -q
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln#4
DEBUG:root:Running: diff -urNp
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpljgwo3
DEBUG:root:Command exited with rc 1: ['diff', '-urNp',
'c:\\users\\rdailey\\appdata\\local\\temp\\tmpivyvra',
'c:\\users\\rdailey\\appdata\\local\\temp\\tmpljgwo3']
--- c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra 2013-03-29
12:39:00.971865100 -0500
+++ c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpljgwo3 2013-03-29
12:39:00.798330400 -0500
@@ -1,44 +0,0 @@
-
-Microsoft Visual Studio Solution File, Format Version 9.00
-# Visual Studio 2005
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = services,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\services\services.vcproj,
{40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = interface,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\interface\interface.vcproj,
{EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = groupware,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\groupware\groupware.vcproj,
{C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = gwserver,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\gwserver\gwserver.vcproj,
{0B59A140-C1D4-4A06-ACD8-5A78745D3C9F}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = gwclient,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\gwclient\gwclient.vcproj,
{933240B0-F445-49E7-AB25-7BAE6B3C458C}
-EndProject
-Global
- GlobalSection(SolutionConfigurationPlatforms) = preSolution
- Debug|Win32 = Debug|Win32
- Release|Win32 = Release|Win32
- EndGlobalSection
- GlobalSection(ProjectConfigurationPlatforms) = postSolution
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 = Debug|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 = Debug|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 = Debug|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
- {0B59A140-C1D4-4A06-ACD8-5A78745D3C9F}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {0B59A140-C1D4-4A06-ACD8-5A78745D3C9F}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 = Debug|Win32
- {0B59A140-C1D4-4A06-ACD8-5A78745D3C9F}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {0B59A140-C1D4-4A06-ACD8-5A78745D3C9F}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
- {933240B0-F445-49E7-AB25-7BAE6B3C458C}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
-
Re: Problem with RBTools 0.5
You can download curl for windows here: http://curl.haxx.se/download.html
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.comwrote:
I'm not on Linux, how can I get you what you want on Windows 7?
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Steven MacLeod ste...@smacleod.ca
wrote:
Hi Robert,
Sorry for the delay in response, this slipped by in my inbox.
Could you please send me the output of:
$ curl
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/review-requests/44580/diffs/
-I
Basically I need to take a look at the headers being returned in the HTTP
request to RB.
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
Using RB version 1.6.3. Output of the command you requested is below:
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Bazaar repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a CVS repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a ClearCase repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Git repository...
DEBUG:root:Running: git rev-parse --git-dir
DEBUG:root:Command exited with rc 128: ['git', 'rev-parse', '--git-dir']
fatal: Not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git
---
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Mercurial repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Perforce repository...
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 info
DEBUG:root:Running: diff --version
DEBUG:root:repository info: Path: perforce-rws2.corp.good.com:3666,
Base path: None, Supports changesets: True
DEBUG:root:Making HTTP GET request to
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/
DEBUG:root:Making HTTP GET request to
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/info/
INFO:root:Generating diff for changenum 303396
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 describe -s 303396
DEBUG:root:Processing delete of
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln
DEBUG:root:Writing
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln#4 to
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 print -o
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra -q
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln#4
DEBUG:root:Running: diff -urNp
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpljgwo3
DEBUG:root:Command exited with rc 1: ['diff', '-urNp',
'c:\\users\\rdailey\\appdata\\local\\temp\\tmpivyvra',
'c:\\users\\rdailey\\appdata\\local\\temp\\tmpljgwo3']
--- c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra 2013-03-29
12:39:00.971865100 -0500
+++ c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpljgwo3 2013-03-29
12:39:00.798330400 -0500
@@ -1,44 +0,0 @@
-
-Microsoft Visual Studio Solution File, Format Version 9.00
-# Visual Studio 2005
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = services,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\services\services.vcproj,
{40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = interface,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\interface\interface.vcproj,
{EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = groupware,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\groupware\groupware.vcproj,
{C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = gwserver,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\gwserver\gwserver.vcproj,
{0B59A140-C1D4-4A06-ACD8-5A78745D3C9F}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = gwclient,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\gwclient\gwclient.vcproj,
{933240B0-F445-49E7-AB25-7BAE6B3C458C}
-EndProject
-Global
- GlobalSection(SolutionConfigurationPlatforms) = preSolution
- Debug|Win32 = Debug|Win32
- Release|Win32 = Release|Win32
- EndGlobalSection
- GlobalSection(ProjectConfigurationPlatforms) = postSolution
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 =
Debug|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 =
Debug|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 =
Debug|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
-
1.6.11 to 1.7.6 Upgrade Issue
I attempted to perfom an upgrade of one of our ReviewBoard installations and I have run into a problem. The first server upgraded fine, but this one is not working. I folloed some of the recommendations in another post, but I was not successful. Thank you for any help you can provide. ~$ sudo rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Upgrading site settings_local.py Updating database. This may take a while. The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. -- begin log output -- Creating tables ... Creating table extensions_registeredextension Creating table diffviewer_filediffdata Upgrading Review Board from 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 There are unapplied evolutions for auth. There are unapplied evolutions for accounts. There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. There are unapplied evolutions for reviews. Adding baseline version for new models Project signature has changed - an evolution is required Installing custom SQL ... Installing indexes ... Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s) *The stored evolutions do not completely resolve all model changes.* Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes required. The following are the changes that could not be resolved: In model scmtools.Repository: Field 'extra_data' has been added Field 'hosting_account' has been added *Error: Your models contain changes that Django Evolution cannot resolve automati* *cally.* ~$ sudo -i ~# mysqldump -p reviewboard reviewboard.sql ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard dumpdata django_evolution django_evolution.json ~# sudo easy_install -U django_evolution ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard list-evolutions Applied evolutions for 'sessions': session_expire_date_db_index Applied evolutions for 'accounts': is_private Applied evolutions for 'changedescs': fields_changed_longtext Applied evolutions for 'diffviewer': add_parent_diffs filediff_filenames_1024_chars diffset_basedir filediff_status Applied evolutions for 'reviews': change_descriptions last_review_timestamp shipit_count default_reviewer_repositories null_repository localsite group_incoming_request_count group_invite_only group_visible default_reviewer_local_site add_issues_to_comments file_attachments Applied evolutions for 'scmtools': bugzilla_url_charfield repository_raw_file_url repository_visible repository_path_length_255 localsite repository_access_control group_site repository_hosting_accounts repository_extra_data_null ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard shell Python 2.6.5 (r265:79063, Oct 1 2012, 22:04:36) [GCC 4.4.3] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. (InteractiveConsole) exit() ~# rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Updating database. This may take a while. The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. -- begin log output -- Creating tables ... There are unapplied evolutions for auth. There are unapplied evolutions for accounts. There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. There are unapplied evolutions for reviews. Project signature has changed - an evolution is required Installing custom SQL ... Installing indexes ... Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s) *The stored evolutions do not completely resolve all model changes.* Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes required. The following are the changes that could not be resolved: In model scmtools.Repository: Field 'extra_data' has been added Field 'hosting_account' has been added *Error: Your models contain changes that Django Evolution cannot resolve automatically.* -Chris Eagan -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 Upgrade Issue
0.6.7-py2.6 On Monday, April 8, 2013 1:46:57 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: Hi Chris, What version of the django_evolution module is installed? Christian -- Christian Hammond - chi...@chipx86.com javascript: Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: I attempted to perfom an upgrade of one of our ReviewBoard installations and I have run into a problem. The first server upgraded fine, but this one is not working. I folloed some of the recommendations in another post, but I was not successful. Thank you for any help you can provide. ** ** ~$ sudo rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Upgrading site settings_local.py Updating database. This may take a while. ** ** The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. ** ** -- begin log output -- Creating tables ... Creating table extensions_registeredextension Creating table diffviewer_filediffdata Upgrading Review Board from 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 There are unapplied evolutions for auth. There are unapplied evolutions for accounts. There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. There are unapplied evolutions for reviews. Adding baseline version for new models Project signature has changed - an evolution is required Installing custom SQL ... Installing indexes ... Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s) *The stored evolutions do not completely resolve all model changes.* Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes required. ** ** The following are the changes that could not be resolved: In model scmtools.Repository: Field 'extra_data' has been added Field 'hosting_account' has been added *Error: Your models contain changes that Django Evolution cannot resolve automati* *cally.* ~$ sudo -i ~# mysqldump -p reviewboard reviewboard.sql ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard dumpdata django_evolution django_evolution.json ~# sudo easy_install -U django_evolution ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard list-evolutions Applied evolutions for 'sessions': session_expire_date_db_index ** ** Applied evolutions for 'accounts': is_private ** ** Applied evolutions for 'changedescs': fields_changed_longtext ** ** Applied evolutions for 'diffviewer': add_parent_diffs filediff_filenames_1024_chars diffset_basedir filediff_status ** ** Applied evolutions for 'reviews': change_descriptions last_review_timestamp shipit_count default_reviewer_repositories null_repository localsite group_incoming_request_count group_invite_only group_visible default_reviewer_local_site add_issues_to_comments file_attachments ** ** Applied evolutions for 'scmtools': bugzilla_url_charfield repository_raw_file_url repository_visible repository_path_length_255 localsite repository_access_control group_site repository_hosting_accounts repository_extra_data_null ** ** ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard shell Python 2.6.5 (r265:79063, Oct 1 2012, 22:04:36) [GCC 4.4.3] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.*** * (InteractiveConsole) exit() ~# rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Updating database. This may take a while. ** ** The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. ** ** -- begin log output -- Creating tables ... There are unapplied evolutions for auth. There are unapplied evolutions for accounts. There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. There are unapplied evolutions for reviews. Project signature has changed - an evolution is required Installing custom SQL ... Installing indexes ... Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s) *The stored evolutions do not completely resolve all model changes.* Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes required. ** ** The following are the changes that could not be resolved: In model scmtools.Repository: Field 'extra_data' has been added Field 'hosting_account' has been added *Error: Your models contain changes that Django Evolution cannot resolve automatically.*
Re: ReviewBoard UI Feature Request
Thanks Christian, let me know if I can assist in any way! On Friday, April 5, 2013 1:57:41 PM UTC-5, Christian Hammond wrote: Hi Jacob, These are all great ideas. The first and last are ones I've given some thought to, but haven't been in a position to work on yet. We're working on modernizing our JavaScript codebase and doing some prep work for 1.8, but sometime in there I'm hoping to do a revamp of the diff viewer. I'll see if I can find a nice way to implement these features in that. Christian On Apr 5, 2013, at 11:46, jacob.j.rosales jacob.j...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: Hi Christian, Not sure if this is available or not, however I was wondering if the following would be hard to add to the base RB code: - Ability to place a maker (Last point of review) in on a file in a review request. We review large change sets and many times, we are multitasking and have to stop mid-review. Today we either have to remember where we left off when we log back in or place a comment saying this is where we last stopped. - Ability to have the file name with the function name as we have in the current version. For instance, when the file is large, and there are many changes across the file, we get the name of the function we are in, but the filename is all the way at the top. - Ability to mark files as reviewed/not-reviewed on a per reviewer basis. This would allow files that have been marked as reviewed to not be expanded in the DiffViewer. I am sure I can riddle off many more, but wanted to put in some top UI enhancement ideas out there. Thanks for the work on this great tool. It has already helped improve quality in our software. -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard...@googlegroups.com javascript: For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to reviewboard...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 Upgrade Issue
Try upgrading to 0.6.9. There were a lot of fixes that went in since your version. Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:53, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: 0.6.7-py2.6 On Monday, April 8, 2013 1:46:57 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: Hi Chris, What version of the django_evolution module is installed? Christian -- Christian Hammond - chi...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: I attempted to perfom an upgrade of one of our ReviewBoard installations and I have run into a problem. The first server upgraded fine, but this one is not working. I folloed some of the recommendations in another post, but I was not successful. Thank you for any help you can provide. ~$ sudo rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Upgrading site settings_local.py Updating database. This may take a while. The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. -- begin log output -- Creating tables ... Creating table extensions_registeredextension Creating table diffviewer_filediffdata Upgrading Review Board from 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 There are unapplied evolutions for auth. There are unapplied evolutions for accounts. There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. There are unapplied evolutions for reviews. Adding baseline version for new models Project signature has changed - an evolution is required Installing custom SQL ... Installing indexes ... Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s) The stored evolutions do not completely resolve all model changes. Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes required. The following are the changes that could not be resolved: In model scmtools.Repository: Field 'extra_data' has been added Field 'hosting_account' has been added Error: Your models contain changes that Django Evolution cannot resolve automati cally. ~$ sudo -i ~# mysqldump -p reviewboard reviewboard.sql ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard dumpdata django_evolution django_evolution.json ~# sudo easy_install -U django_evolution ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard list-evolutions Applied evolutions for 'sessions': session_expire_date_db_index Applied evolutions for 'accounts': is_private Applied evolutions for 'changedescs': fields_changed_longtext Applied evolutions for 'diffviewer': add_parent_diffs filediff_filenames_1024_chars diffset_basedir filediff_status Applied evolutions for 'reviews': change_descriptions last_review_timestamp shipit_count default_reviewer_repositories null_repository localsite group_incoming_request_count group_invite_only group_visible default_reviewer_local_site add_issues_to_comments file_attachments Applied evolutions for 'scmtools': bugzilla_url_charfield repository_raw_file_url repository_visible repository_path_length_255 localsite repository_access_control group_site repository_hosting_accounts repository_extra_data_null ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard shell Python 2.6.5 (r265:79063, Oct 1 2012, 22:04:36) [GCC 4.4.3] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. (InteractiveConsole) exit() ~# rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Updating database. This may take a while. The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. -- begin log output -- Creating tables ... There are unapplied evolutions for auth. There are unapplied evolutions for accounts. There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. There are unapplied evolutions for reviews. Project signature has changed - an evolution is required Installing custom SQL ... Installing indexes ... Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s) The stored evolutions do not completely resolve all model changes. Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes required. The following are the changes that could not be resolved: In model scmtools.Repository: Field 'extra_data' has been added Field 'hosting_account' has been added Error: Your models contain changes that Django Evolution cannot resolve automatically. -Chris Eagan -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at
Re: 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 Upgrade Issue
I think my last answer was wrong. I tried to upgrade and got this: ~# easy_install -U django_evolution Searching for django-evolution Reading http://downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/ReviewBoard/1.6/ Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/django_evolution/ Reading http://code.google.com/p/django-evolution/ Best match: django-evolution 0.6.9 Processing django_evolution-0.6.9-py2.6.egg django-evolution 0.6.9 is already the active version in easy-install.pth Using /usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/django_evolution-0.6.9-py2.6.egg Processing dependencies for django-evolution Finished processing dependencies for django-evolution On Monday, April 8, 2013 1:57:20 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: Try upgrading to 0.6.9. There were a lot of fixes that went in since your version. Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:53, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: 0.6.7-py2.6 On Monday, April 8, 2013 1:46:57 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: Hi Chris, What version of the django_evolution module is installed? Christian -- Christian Hammond - chi...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: I attempted to perfom an upgrade of one of our ReviewBoard installations and I have run into a problem. The first server upgraded fine, but this one is not working. I folloed some of the recommendations in another post, but I was not successful. Thank you for any help you can provide. ** ** ~$ sudo rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Upgrading site settings_local.py Updating database. This may take a while. ** ** The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. ** ** -- begin log output -- Creating tables ... Creating table extensions_registeredextension Creating table diffviewer_filediffdata Upgrading Review Board from 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 There are unapplied evolutions for auth. There are unapplied evolutions for accounts. There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. There are unapplied evolutions for reviews. Adding baseline version for new models Project signature has changed - an evolution is required Installing custom SQL ... Installing indexes ... Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s) *The stored evolutions do not completely resolve all model changes.* Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes required. ** ** The following are the changes that could not be resolved: In model scmtools.Repository: Field 'extra_data' has been added Field 'hosting_account' has been added *Error: Your models contain changes that Django Evolution cannot resolve automati* *cally.* ~$ sudo -i ~# mysqldump -p reviewboard reviewboard.sql ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard dumpdata django_evolution django_evolution.json ~# sudo easy_install -U django_evolution ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard list-evolutions Applied evolutions for 'sessions': session_expire_date_db_index ** ** Applied evolutions for 'accounts': is_private ** ** Applied evolutions for 'changedescs': fields_changed_longtext ** ** Applied evolutions for 'diffviewer': add_parent_diffs filediff_filenames_1024_chars diffset_basedir filediff_status ** ** Applied evolutions for 'reviews': change_descriptions last_review_timestamp shipit_count default_reviewer_repositories null_repository localsite group_incoming_request_count group_invite_only group_visible default_reviewer_local_site add_issues_to_comments file_attachments ** ** Applied evolutions for 'scmtools': bugzilla_url_charfield repository_raw_file_url repository_visible repository_path_length_255 localsite repository_access_control group_site repository_hosting_accounts repository_extra_data_null ** ** ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard shell Python 2.6.5 (r265:79063, Oct 1 2012, 22:04:36) [GCC 4.4.3] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.** ** (InteractiveConsole) exit() ~# rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Updating database. This may take a while. ** ** The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. ** ** -- begin log output
Re: 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 Upgrade Issue
When you mentioned different servers, were these each with their own database? It's complaining about fields that already existed in 1.6.11, which shouldn't be correct. It's also showing that those evolutions were already applied. At any point did you ever downgrade or wipe an evolution? Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:59, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: I think my last answer was wrong. I tried to upgrade and got this: ~# easy_install -U django_evolution Searching for django-evolution Reading http://downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/ReviewBoard/1.6/ Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/django_evolution/ Reading http://code.google.com/p/django-evolution/ Best match: django-evolution 0.6.9 Processing django_evolution-0.6.9-py2.6.egg django-evolution 0.6.9 is already the active version in easy-install.pth Using /usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/django_evolution-0.6.9-py2.6.egg Processing dependencies for django-evolution Finished processing dependencies for django-evolution On Monday, April 8, 2013 1:57:20 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: Try upgrading to 0.6.9. There were a lot of fixes that went in since your version. Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:53, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: 0.6.7-py2.6 On Monday, April 8, 2013 1:46:57 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: Hi Chris, What version of the django_evolution module is installed? Christian -- Christian Hammond - chi...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: I attempted to perfom an upgrade of one of our ReviewBoard installations and I have run into a problem. The first server upgraded fine, but this one is not working. I folloed some of the recommendations in another post, but I was not successful. Thank you for any help you can provide. ~$ sudo rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Upgrading site settings_local.py Updating database. This may take a while. The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. -- begin log output -- Creating tables ... Creating table extensions_registeredextension Creating table diffviewer_filediffdata Upgrading Review Board from 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 There are unapplied evolutions for auth. There are unapplied evolutions for accounts. There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. There are unapplied evolutions for reviews. Adding baseline version for new models Project signature has changed - an evolution is required Installing custom SQL ... Installing indexes ... Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s) The stored evolutions do not completely resolve all model changes. Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes required. The following are the changes that could not be resolved: In model scmtools.Repository: Field 'extra_data' has been added Field 'hosting_account' has been added Error: Your models contain changes that Django Evolution cannot resolve automati cally. ~$ sudo -i ~# mysqldump -p reviewboard reviewboard.sql ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard dumpdata django_evolution django_evolution.json ~# sudo easy_install -U django_evolution ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard list-evolutions Applied evolutions for 'sessions': session_expire_date_db_index Applied evolutions for 'accounts': is_private Applied evolutions for 'changedescs': fields_changed_longtext Applied evolutions for 'diffviewer': add_parent_diffs filediff_filenames_1024_chars diffset_basedir filediff_status Applied evolutions for 'reviews': change_descriptions last_review_timestamp shipit_count default_reviewer_repositories null_repository localsite group_incoming_request_count group_invite_only group_visible default_reviewer_local_site add_issues_to_comments file_attachments Applied evolutions for 'scmtools': bugzilla_url_charfield repository_raw_file_url repository_visible repository_path_length_255 localsite repository_access_control group_site repository_hosting_accounts repository_extra_data_null ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard shell Python 2.6.5 (r265:79063, Oct 1 2012, 22:04:36) [GCC 4.4.3] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. (InteractiveConsole) exit() ~# rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Updating database. This may take a while. The log output below, including
Re: 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 Upgrade Issue
Yes, each server used it's own independent database. They exist on fully distinct virtual machines. This is only the second time this server has been upgraded. The first upgrade attempt I did today was run with the older version of django_evolution. That might be why the upgrade wasn't successful and why some evolutions were already applied. Unfortunately, I was over-confident and didn't back up the database prior to my upgrade attempt because the first server had upgraded fine. The first server had the newer version of django_evolution installed and I failed to check that the second server did prior to the upgrade. I have a backup of the database after the first upgrade attempt. I did not downgrade or wipe any evolutions. -Chris On Monday, April 8, 2013 2:11:02 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: When you mentioned different servers, were these each with their own database? It's complaining about fields that already existed in 1.6.11, which shouldn't be correct. It's also showing that those evolutions were already applied. At any point did you ever downgrade or wipe an evolution? Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:59, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: I think my last answer was wrong. I tried to upgrade and got this: ~# easy_install -U django_evolution Searching for django-evolution Reading http://downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/ReviewBoard/1.6/ Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/django_evolution/ Reading http://code.google.com/p/django-evolution/ Best match: django-evolution 0.6.9 Processing django_evolution-0.6.9-py2.6.egg django-evolution 0.6.9 is already the active version in easy-install.pth Using /usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/django_evolution-0.6.9-py2.6.egg Processing dependencies for django-evolution Finished processing dependencies for django-evolution On Monday, April 8, 2013 1:57:20 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: Try upgrading to 0.6.9. There were a lot of fixes that went in since your version. Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:53, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: 0.6.7-py2.6 On Monday, April 8, 2013 1:46:57 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: Hi Chris, What version of the django_evolution module is installed? Christian -- Christian Hammond - chi...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: I attempted to perfom an upgrade of one of our ReviewBoard installations and I have run into a problem. The first server upgraded fine, but this one is not working. I folloed some of the recommendations in another post, but I was not successful. Thank you for any help you can provide. ** ** ~$ sudo rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Upgrading site settings_local.py Updating database. This may take a while. ** ** The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. ** ** -- begin log output -- Creating tables ... Creating table extensions_registeredextension Creating table diffviewer_filediffdata Upgrading Review Board from 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 There are unapplied evolutions for auth. There are unapplied evolutions for accounts. There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. There are unapplied evolutions for reviews. Adding baseline version for new models Project signature has changed - an evolution is required Installing custom SQL ... Installing indexes ... Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s) *The stored evolutions do not completely resolve all model changes.* Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the changes required. ** ** The following are the changes that could not be resolved: In model scmtools.Repository: Field 'extra_data' has been added Field 'hosting_account' has been added *Error: Your models contain changes that Django Evolution cannot resolve automati* *cally.* ~$ sudo -i ~# mysqldump -p reviewboard reviewboard.sql ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard dumpdata django_evolution django_evolution.json ~# sudo easy_install -U django_evolution ~# rb-site manage /var/lib/reviewboard list-evolutions Applied evolutions for 'sessions': session_expire_date_db_index ** ** Applied evolutions for 'accounts': is_private ** ** Applied evolutions for 'changedescs': fields_changed_longtext ** ** Applied evolutions for 'diffviewer': add_parent_diffs filediff_filenames_1024_chars diffset_basedir filediff_status ** ** Applied evolutions for 'reviews':
Re: 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 Upgrade Issue
Sorry about that.. We hit some rough bugs in Django Evolution (or rather, introduced scenarios it wasn't prepared for), but I do think that going forward, these issues should be mostly gone. So I don't normally advise this, but here's what I'd recommend in this case: 1) Back up your database 2) Run: rb-site manage /path/to/site evolve -- --hint --execute Clear your memcached and make sure that your review requests are still working properly. The --hint --execute tells Django Evolution to just make the database match the current schema. Given the situation here where those should already be in the database, I don't know what it'll do to add them (hopefully just update your schema history). If all fails, you can restore the database backup and we can try again. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, each server used it's own independent database. They exist on fully distinct virtual machines. This is only the second time this server has been upgraded. The first upgrade attempt I did today was run with the older version of django_evolution. That might be why the upgrade wasn't successful and why some evolutions were already applied. Unfortunately, I was over-confident and didn't back up the database prior to my upgrade attempt because the first server had upgraded fine. The first server had the newer version of django_evolution installed and I failed to check that the second server did prior to the upgrade. I have a backup of the database after the first upgrade attempt. I did not downgrade or wipe any evolutions. -Chris On Monday, April 8, 2013 2:11:02 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: When you mentioned different servers, were these each with their own database? It's complaining about fields that already existed in 1.6.11, which shouldn't be correct. It's also showing that those evolutions were already applied. At any point did you ever downgrade or wipe an evolution? Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:59, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: I think my last answer was wrong. I tried to upgrade and got this: ~# easy_install -U django_evolution Searching for django-evolution Reading http://downloads.reviewboard.**org/releases/ReviewBoard/1.6/http://downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/ReviewBoard/1.6/ Reading http://pypi.python.org/simple/**django_evolution/http://pypi.python.org/simple/django_evolution/ Reading http://code.google.com/p/**django-evolution/http://code.google.com/p/django-evolution/ Best match: django-evolution 0.6.9 Processing django_evolution-0.6.9-py2.6.**egg django-evolution 0.6.9 is already the active version in easy-install.pth Using /usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-**packages/django_evolution-0.6.** 9-py2.6.egg Processing dependencies for django-evolution Finished processing dependencies for django-evolution On Monday, April 8, 2013 1:57:20 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: Try upgrading to 0.6.9. There were a lot of fixes that went in since your version. Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:53, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: 0.6.7-py2.6 On Monday, April 8, 2013 1:46:57 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: Hi Chris, What version of the django_evolution module is installed? Christian -- Christian Hammond - chi...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Chris Eagan cea...@gmail.com wrote: I attempted to perfom an upgrade of one of our ReviewBoard installations and I have run into a problem. The first server upgraded fine, but this one is not working. I folloed some of the recommendations in another post, but I was not successful. Thank you for any help you can provide. ** ** ~$ sudo rb-site upgrade /var/lib/reviewboard Rebuilding directory structure Upgrading site settings_local.py Updating database. This may take a while. ** ** The log output below, including warnings and errors, can be ignored unless upgrade fails. ** ** -- begin log output -- Creating tables ... Creating table extensions_registeredextension Creating table diffviewer_filediffdata Upgrading Review Board from 1.6.11 to 1.7.6 There are unapplied evolutions for auth. There are unapplied evolutions for accounts. There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. There are unapplied evolutions for reviews. Adding baseline version for new models Project signature has changed - an evolution is required Installing custom SQL ... Installing indexes ... Installed 0 object(s) from 0 fixture(s) *The stored evolutions do not completely resolve all model changes.* Run `./manage.py evolve --hint` to see a suggestion for the
Re: Problem with RBTools 0.5
Here you go:
C:\workcurl http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/review-requests/44580/diffs/
-I
HTTP/1.1 405 METHOD NOT ALLOWED
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 20:24:40 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.21 (Unix) mod_wsgi/3.3 Python/2.7 mod_ssl/2.2.17
OpenSSL/1.0.0c
Content-Language: en-us
Expires: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 20:24:40 GMT
Vary: Accept,Cookie,Accept-Language
Last-Modified: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 20:24:40 GMT
Allow: GET, POST
Cache-Control: max-age=0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Steven MacLeod ste...@smacleod.ca wrote:
Hi Robert,
Sorry for the delay in response, this slipped by in my inbox.
Could you please send me the output of:
$ curl http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/review-requests/44580/diffs/
-I
Basically I need to take a look at the headers being returned in the HTTP
request to RB.
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
Using RB version 1.6.3. Output of the command you requested is below:
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Bazaar repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a CVS repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a ClearCase repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Git repository...
DEBUG:root:Running: git rev-parse --git-dir
DEBUG:root:Command exited with rc 128: ['git', 'rev-parse', '--git-dir']
fatal: Not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git
---
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Mercurial repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Perforce repository...
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 info
DEBUG:root:Running: diff --version
DEBUG:root:repository info: Path: perforce-rws2.corp.good.com:3666,
Base path: None, Supports changesets: True
DEBUG:root:Making HTTP GET request to
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/
DEBUG:root:Making HTTP GET request to
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/info/
INFO:root:Generating diff for changenum 303396
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 describe -s 303396
DEBUG:root:Processing delete of
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln
DEBUG:root:Writing
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln#4 to
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 print -o
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra -q
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln#4
DEBUG:root:Running: diff -urNp
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpljgwo3
DEBUG:root:Command exited with rc 1: ['diff', '-urNp',
'c:\\users\\rdailey\\appdata\\local\\temp\\tmpivyvra',
'c:\\users\\rdailey\\appdata\\local\\temp\\tmpljgwo3']
--- c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra 2013-03-29
12:39:00.971865100 -0500
+++ c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpljgwo3 2013-03-29
12:39:00.798330400 -0500
@@ -1,44 +0,0 @@
-
-Microsoft Visual Studio Solution File, Format Version 9.00
-# Visual Studio 2005
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = services,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\services\services.vcproj,
{40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = interface,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\interface\interface.vcproj,
{EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = groupware,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\groupware\groupware.vcproj,
{C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = gwserver,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\gwserver\gwserver.vcproj,
{0B59A140-C1D4-4A06-ACD8-5A78745D3C9F}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = gwclient,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\gwclient\gwclient.vcproj,
{933240B0-F445-49E7-AB25-7BAE6B3C458C}
-EndProject
-Global
- GlobalSection(SolutionConfigurationPlatforms) = preSolution
- Debug|Win32 = Debug|Win32
- Release|Win32 = Release|Win32
- EndGlobalSection
- GlobalSection(ProjectConfigurationPlatforms) = postSolution
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 = Debug|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 = Debug|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 = Debug|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
-
Re: Problem with RBTools 0.5
It appears your Apache server won't allow a HEAD request.
Can I see the output of:
$ curl http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/review-requests/44580/diffs/
-i
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.comwrote:
Here you go:
C:\workcurl
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/review-requests/44580/diffs/
-I
HTTP/1.1 405 METHOD NOT ALLOWED
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 20:24:40 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.21 (Unix) mod_wsgi/3.3 Python/2.7 mod_ssl/2.2.17
OpenSSL/1.0.0c
Content-Language: en-us
Expires: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 20:24:40 GMT
Vary: Accept,Cookie,Accept-Language
Last-Modified: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 20:24:40 GMT
Allow: GET, POST
Cache-Control: max-age=0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Steven MacLeod ste...@smacleod.ca
wrote:
Hi Robert,
Sorry for the delay in response, this slipped by in my inbox.
Could you please send me the output of:
$ curl
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/review-requests/44580/diffs/
-I
Basically I need to take a look at the headers being returned in the HTTP
request to RB.
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com
wrote:
Using RB version 1.6.3. Output of the command you requested is below:
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Bazaar repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a CVS repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a ClearCase repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Git repository...
DEBUG:root:Running: git rev-parse --git-dir
DEBUG:root:Command exited with rc 128: ['git', 'rev-parse', '--git-dir']
fatal: Not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git
---
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Mercurial repository...
DEBUG:root:Checking for a Perforce repository...
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 info
DEBUG:root:Running: diff --version
DEBUG:root:repository info: Path: perforce-rws2.corp.good.com:3666,
Base path: None, Supports changesets: True
DEBUG:root:Making HTTP GET request to
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/
DEBUG:root:Making HTTP GET request to
http://reviewboard.corp.good.com/api/info/
INFO:root:Generating diff for changenum 303396
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 describe -s 303396
DEBUG:root:Processing delete of
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln
DEBUG:root:Writing
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln#4 to
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra
DEBUG:root:Running: p4 print -o
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra -q
//depot/dev/DominoProcessDecomp/DominoProcessDecomp.sln#4
DEBUG:root:Running: diff -urNp
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra
c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpljgwo3
DEBUG:root:Command exited with rc 1: ['diff', '-urNp',
'c:\\users\\rdailey\\appdata\\local\\temp\\tmpivyvra',
'c:\\users\\rdailey\\appdata\\local\\temp\\tmpljgwo3']
--- c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpivyvra 2013-03-29
12:39:00.971865100 -0500
+++ c:\users\rdailey\appdata\local\temp\tmpljgwo3 2013-03-29
12:39:00.798330400 -0500
@@ -1,44 +0,0 @@
-
-Microsoft Visual Studio Solution File, Format Version 9.00
-# Visual Studio 2005
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = services,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\services\services.vcproj,
{40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = interface,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\interface\interface.vcproj,
{EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = groupware,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\groupware\groupware.vcproj,
{C4D3A251-B853-43E2-84C8-5501FE40EEE8}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = gwserver,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\gwserver\gwserver.vcproj,
{0B59A140-C1D4-4A06-ACD8-5A78745D3C9F}
-EndProject
-Project({8BC9CEB8-8B4A-11D0-8D11-00A0C91BC942}) = gwclient,
server\gmmserver\domino\server\gwclient\gwclient.vcproj,
{933240B0-F445-49E7-AB25-7BAE6B3C458C}
-EndProject
-Global
- GlobalSection(SolutionConfigurationPlatforms) = preSolution
- Debug|Win32 = Debug|Win32
- Release|Win32 = Release|Win32
- EndGlobalSection
- GlobalSection(ProjectConfigurationPlatforms) = postSolution
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 =
Debug|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Release|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Release|Win32
- {40E4563C-EDCE-4F19-8A3F-F9497265ACEE}.Release|Win32.Build.0 =
Release|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Debug|Win32.ActiveCfg =
Debug|Win32
- {EADFA55E-6196-44CC-A496-1FDEC07DDE54}.Debug|Win32.Build.0 =
Debug|Win32
-
Re: Error during adding Repository to SSL enabled perforce.
Hi Chris, Reviewboard is using the same version of python for which i have provided example as below [GCC 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-46)] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. import P4 There are no Two version of p4python installed, how do i figure it out. i can see my site-packages contains following files after p4python build and install i.e P4.py, P4.pyc, P4.pyo, P4API.so On Tuesday, April 9, 2013 12:45:35 AM UTC+5:30, Christian Hammond wrote: Is Review Board using the same version of Python? Any chance there are now two copies of p4python installed? Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 4:01, chuck j cjerr...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: Dear All, This is very critical, I am still not able to add SSL enabled perforce repository to reviewboard, Please help me. Since my machine was not having openssl 1.0.1, i need to build and install this version of openssl. I followed the instruction from document, downloaded openssl 1.0.1e ./config --prefix=/usr/local --openssldir=/usr/local/openssl zlib zlib-dynamic shared make make test make install Then i did following step Edit /etc/ld.so.conf add to paths... /usr/local/lib64 Update the run-time linker... # ldconfig verified with below command: ldd /usr/local/bin/openssl libssl.so.1.0.0 = /usr/local/lib64/libssl.so.1.0.0 (0x2b08a088c000) libcrypto.so.1.0.0 = /usr/local/lib64/libcrypto.so.1.0.0 (0x2b08a0af1000) libdl.so.2 = /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x003b2ac0) libc.so.6 = /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x003b2a40) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x003b2a00) /usr/local/bin/openssl version OpenSSL 1.0.1e 11 Feb 2013 Then I build p4python with --ssl swtich. python setup.py build --apidir /root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 --ssl /usr/local/lib64 API Release 2012.2 running build running build_py creating build creating build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7 copying P4.py - build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7 running build_ext building 'P4API' extension creating build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7 gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c P4API.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/P4API.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c PythonClientAPI.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/PythonClientAPI.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c PythonClientUser.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/PythonClientUser.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c SpecMgr.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/SpecMgr.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c P4Result.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/P4Result.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall
Re: Error during adding Repository to SSL enabled perforce.
Here are some more information: I can see there was old P4Python-2008.2-py2.7.egg-info file present at site-packages folder, But i had make sure this version's P4.py, P4.pyc, P4.pyo, P4API.so are moved to some safe place. Will this file make any difference. cat easy-install.pth import sys; sys.__plen = len(sys.path) ./setuptools-0.6c11-py2.7.egg ./python_memcached-1.47-py2.7.egg ./recaptcha_client-1.0.6-py2.7.egg ./python_dateutil-1.5-py2.7.egg ./flup-1.0.3.dev_20110405-py2.7.egg ./PIL-1.1.6-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg ./python_ldap-2.3.13-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg ./MySQL_python-1.2.3-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg ./ReviewBoard-1.7.6-py2.7.egg ./pytz-2013b-py2.7.egg ./Pygments-1.6-py2.7.egg ./paramiko-1.10.0-py2.7.egg ./mimeparse-0.1.3-py2.7.egg ./Markdown-2.3.1-py2.7.egg ./docutils-0.10-py2.7.egg ./django_pipeline-1.2.24-py2.7.egg ./Djblets-0.7.11-py2.7.egg ./django_evolution-0.6.9-py2.7.egg ./Django-1.4.5-py2.7.egg ./pycrypto-2.6-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg ./feedparser-5.1.3-py2.7.egg import sys; new=sys.path[sys.__plen:]; del sys.path[sys.__plen:]; p=getattr(sys,'__egginsert',0); sys.path[p:p]=new; sys.__egginsert = p+len(new) On Tuesday, April 9, 2013 10:39:52 AM UTC+5:30, chuck j wrote: Hi Chris, Reviewboard is using the same version of python for which i have provided example as below [GCC 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-46)] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. import P4 There are no Two version of p4python installed, how do i figure it out. i can see my site-packages contains following files after p4python build and install i.e P4.py, P4.pyc, P4.pyo, P4API.so On Tuesday, April 9, 2013 12:45:35 AM UTC+5:30, Christian Hammond wrote: Is Review Board using the same version of Python? Any chance there are now two copies of p4python installed? Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 4:01, chuck j cjerr...@gmail.com wrote: Dear All, This is very critical, I am still not able to add SSL enabled perforce repository to reviewboard, Please help me. Since my machine was not having openssl 1.0.1, i need to build and install this version of openssl. I followed the instruction from document, downloaded openssl 1.0.1e ./config --prefix=/usr/local --openssldir=/usr/local/openssl zlib zlib-dynamic shared make make test make install Then i did following step Edit /etc/ld.so.conf add to paths... /usr/local/lib64 Update the run-time linker... # ldconfig verified with below command: ldd /usr/local/bin/openssl libssl.so.1.0.0 = /usr/local/lib64/libssl.so.1.0.0 (0x2b08a088c000) libcrypto.so.1.0.0 = /usr/local/lib64/libcrypto.so.1.0.0 (0x2b08a0af1000) libdl.so.2 = /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x003b2ac0) libc.so.6 = /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x003b2a40) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x003b2a00) /usr/local/bin/openssl version OpenSSL 1.0.1e 11 Feb 2013 Then I build p4python with --ssl swtich. python setup.py build --apidir /root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 --ssl /usr/local/lib64 API Release 2012.2 running build running build_py creating build creating build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7 copying P4.py - build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7 running build_ext building 'P4API' extension creating build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7 gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c P4API.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/P4API.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c PythonClientAPI.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/PythonClientAPI.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c PythonClientUser.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/PythonClientUser.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for
Re: Error during adding Repository to SSL enabled perforce.
Yeah, it's possible it's grabbing that one instead. If p4python is successfully built using OpenSSL, the only thing I can think of to cause that error would be Review Board using an older copy somehow. Where's the new P4.* files? Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com On Apr 8, 2013, at 10:39 PM, chuck j cjerry2...@gmail.com wrote: Here are some more information: I can see there was old P4Python-2008.2-py2.7.egg-info file present at site-packages folder, But i had make sure this version's P4.py, P4.pyc, P4.pyo, P4API.so are moved to some safe place. Will this file make any difference. cat easy-install.pth import sys; sys.__plen = len(sys.path) ./setuptools-0.6c11-py2.7.egg ./python_memcached-1.47-py2.7.egg ./recaptcha_client-1.0.6-py2.7.egg ./python_dateutil-1.5-py2.7.egg ./flup-1.0.3.dev_20110405-py2.7.egg ./PIL-1.1.6-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg ./python_ldap-2.3.13-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg ./MySQL_python-1.2.3-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg ./ReviewBoard-1.7.6-py2.7.egg ./pytz-2013b-py2.7.egg ./Pygments-1.6-py2.7.egg ./paramiko-1.10.0-py2.7.egg ./mimeparse-0.1.3-py2.7.egg ./Markdown-2.3.1-py2.7.egg ./docutils-0.10-py2.7.egg ./django_pipeline-1.2.24-py2.7.egg ./Djblets-0.7.11-py2.7.egg ./django_evolution-0.6.9-py2.7.egg ./Django-1.4.5-py2.7.egg ./pycrypto-2.6-py2.7-linux-x86_64.egg ./feedparser-5.1.3-py2.7.egg import sys; new=sys.path[sys.__plen:]; del sys.path[sys.__plen:]; p=getattr(sys,'__egginsert',0); sys.path[p:p]=new; sys.__egginsert = p+len(new) On Tuesday, April 9, 2013 10:39:52 AM UTC+5:30, chuck j wrote: Hi Chris, Reviewboard is using the same version of python for which i have provided example as below [GCC 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-46)] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. import P4 There are no Two version of p4python installed, how do i figure it out. i can see my site-packages contains following files after p4python build and install i.e P4.py, P4.pyc, P4.pyo, P4API.so On Tuesday, April 9, 2013 12:45:35 AM UTC+5:30, Christian Hammond wrote: Is Review Board using the same version of Python? Any chance there are now two copies of p4python installed? Christian On Apr 8, 2013, at 4:01, chuck j cjerr...@gmail.com wrote: Dear All, This is very critical, I am still not able to add SSL enabled perforce repository to reviewboard, Please help me. Since my machine was not having openssl 1.0.1, i need to build and install this version of openssl. I followed the instruction from document, downloaded openssl 1.0.1e ./config --prefix=/usr/local --openssldir=/usr/local/openssl zlib zlib-dynamic shared make make test make install Then i did following step Edit /etc/ld.so.conf add to paths... /usr/local/lib64 Update the run-time linker... # ldconfig verified with below command: ldd /usr/local/bin/openssl libssl.so.1.0.0 = /usr/local/lib64/libssl.so.1.0.0 (0x2b08a088c000) libcrypto.so.1.0.0 = /usr/local/lib64/libcrypto.so.1.0.0 (0x2b08a0af1000) libdl.so.2 = /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x003b2ac0) libc.so.6 = /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x003b2a40) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x003b2a00) /usr/local/bin/openssl version OpenSSL 1.0.1e 11 Feb 2013 Then I build p4python with --ssl swtich. python setup.py build --apidir /root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 --ssl /usr/local/lib64 API Release 2012.2 running build running build_py creating build creating build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7 copying P4.py - build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7 running build_ext building 'P4API' extension creating build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7 gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c P4API.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/P4API.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -fPIC -DID_OS=LINUX26X86_64 -DID_REL=2012.2 -DID_PATCH=549493 -DID_API=2012.2/585708 -DID_Y=2012 -DID_M=11 -DID_D=05 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708 -I/root/work/src/p4api-2012.2.585708/include/p4 -I/usr/local/include/python2.7 -c PythonClientAPI.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/PythonClientAPI.o -DOS_LINUX -DOS_LINUX26 -DOS_LINUXX86_64 -DOS_LINUX26X86_64 cc1plus: warning: command line option -Wstrict-prototypes is valid for Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++ gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3
Re: Issue 2544 in reviewboard: HTTP 500 when performing search
Comment #4 on issue 2544 by nmonk...@gmail.com: HTTP 500 when performing search http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=2544 This worked for me on 12.04, pylucene 2.3.1. Thanks for posting the solution. -- You received this message because this project is configured to send all issue notifications to this address. You may adjust your notification preferences at: https://code.google.com/hosting/settings -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard-issues group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to reviewboard-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to reviewboard-issues@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard-issues?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
