Re: [fossil-users] removing a large directory
I think that by fossil rm name_of_the_directory, it deletes the entire directory. Le 14/04/2012 07:39, Russ Paielli a écrit : I removed an entire directory from my filesystem. It contained hundreds of data files. Now I want to remove it from my fossil repository, but I don't want to remove each file individually. The fossil rm command does not seem to take wild cards or accept a recursive command-line option. What is the simplest way to remove an entire directory from a fossil repo? Thanks. --Russ P. ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] removing a large directory
I tried that, of course. It didn't work. On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:06 PM, vince vinc...@neuf.fr wrote: I think that by fossil rm name_of_the_directory, it deletes the entire directory. Le 14/04/2012 07:39, Russ Paielli a écrit : I removed an entire directory from my filesystem. It contained hundreds of data files. Now I want to remove it from my fossil repository, but I don't want to remove each file individually. The fossil rm command does not seem to take wild cards or accept a recursive command-line option. What is the simplest way to remove an entire directory from a fossil repo? Thanks. --Russ P. ___ fossil-users mailing listfossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.orghttp://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- http://RussP.us ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] removing a large directory
that's work for me : D:\temp\test..\fossil.exe ls dir1/P1050850.JPG dir1/P1050851.JPG dir1/P1050852.JPG dir1/P1050864.JPG dir1/dir3/P1050875.JPG dir1/dir3/P1050880.JPG dir1/dir3/P1050912.JPG dir1/dir3/P1060008.JPG dir2/DSC00811.JPG dir2/DSC00812.JPG dir2/DSC00814.JPG dir2/DSC00815.JPG D:\temp\test..\fossil.exe rm dir1 DELETED dir1/P1050850.JPG DELETED dir1/P1050851.JPG DELETED dir1/P1050852.JPG DELETED dir1/P1050864.JPG DELETED dir1/dir3/P1050875.JPG DELETED dir1/dir3/P1050880.JPG DELETED dir1/dir3/P1050912.JPG DELETED dir1/dir3/P1060008.JPG D:\temp\test..\fossil.exe commit # Enter comments on this check-in. Lines beginning with # are ignored. # The check-in comment follows wiki formatting rules. # # user: vince # tags: trunk # # DELETEDdir1/P1050850.JPG # DELETEDdir1/P1050851.JPG # DELETEDdir1/P1050852.JPG # DELETEDdir1/P1050864.JPG # DELETEDdir1/dir3/P1050875.JPG # DELETEDdir1/dir3/P1050880.JPG # DELETEDdir1/dir3/P1050912.JPG # DELETEDdir1/dir3/P1060008.JPG # # Since no default text editor is set using EDITOR or VISUAL # environment variables or the fossil set editor command, # and because no check-in comment was specified using the -m # or -M command-line options, you will need to enter the # check-in comment below. Type . on a line by itself when # you are done: ok . New_Version: 4b780f5c5cf245b344e998c85753a26149e4a88c D:\temp\test..\fossil.exe ls dir2/DSC00811.JPG dir2/DSC00812.JPG dir2/DSC00814.JPG dir2/DSC00815.JPG Le 14/04/2012 08:31, Russ Paielli a écrit : I tried that, of course. It didn't work. On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:06 PM, vince vinc...@neuf.fr mailto:vinc...@neuf.fr wrote: I think that by fossil rm name_of_the_directory, it deletes the entire directory. Le 14/04/2012 07:39, Russ Paielli a écrit : I removed an entire directory from my filesystem. It contained hundreds of data files. Now I want to remove it from my fossil repository, but I don't want to remove each file individually. The fossil rm command does not seem to take wild cards or accept a recursive command-line option. What is the simplest way to remove an entire directory from a fossil repo? Thanks. --Russ P. ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org mailto:fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org mailto:fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- http://RussP.us ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files
Hello, I am trying to merge my local fossil repo with trunk and all I receive is message fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files. I thought it might be related to use of my patched version of fossil.exe but the same message appears with latest windows binary from fossil site. Previously, I have merged my local fossil repo literally hundred’s times so I am quite confused what might went wrong. Rebuilding repo does not help. I know the message comes from pivot.c [http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/artifact/01042d5f6?ln=87] as used in merge.c [http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/artifact/0735646a51a?ln=167] Last time I pulled artifact from fossil canonical server I received a message *** time skew *** server is slow by 32.3 seconds. Could this lead to perceived problem? What else should I try to solve problem with merge? Thanks. Peter c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil ver This is fossil version 1.22 [5dd5d39e7c] 2012-03-19 12:45:47 UTC c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil rebu c:\soft\bin\myfossilclone.fossil 100.0% complete... c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil merge trunk c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossil\fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil merge --debug trunk c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossil\fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] Fossil update: Total network traffic does not add up
I did a recent update of my fossil repository. It shows that a total of 4243 bytes were sent and 95998 bytes were received. However if I add the numbers in the bytes column I get 6395 and 181518 bytes, almost double the amount. Why the difference? Is one compressed and the other uncompressed? d:\Software\Fossilfossil update Autosync: http://www.fossil-scm.org/ Bytes Cards Artifacts Deltas Sent: 177 2 0 0 Received:3712 81 0 0 Sent:3937 82 0 0 Received: 153580161 7 73 Sent:2104 43 0 0 Received: 20514122 1 40 Sent: 177 2 0 0 Received:3712 81 0 0 Total network traffic: 4243 bytes sent, 95998 bytes received ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Fossil update: Total network traffic does not add up
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 4:30 AM, Jos Groot Lipman donts...@home.nl wrote: ** I did a recent update of my fossil repository. It shows that a total of 4243 bytes were sent and 95998 bytes were received. However if I add the numbers in the bytes column I get 6395 and 181518 bytes, almost double the amount. Why the difference? Is one compressed and the other uncompressed? The individual Sent and Received lines are measuring uncompressed content. The total is showing the actual compressed byte-count sent over-the-wire. d:\Software\Fossilfossil update Autosync: http://www.fossil-scm.org/ Bytes Cards Artifacts Deltas Sent: 177 2 0 0 Received:3712 81 0 0 Sent:3937 82 0 0 Received: 153580161 7 73 Sent:2104 43 0 0 Received: 20514122 1 40 Sent: 177 2 0 0 Received:3712 81 0 0 Total network traffic: 4243 bytes sent, 95998 bytes received ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] turning off gpg
Yes it works, thanks! It seems that fossil help branch doesn't list -nosign option. Also, when clearsign is globally off shouldn't nosign be automatically turned on when creating new branches? just a thought, Marek Original Message From：James Turner ja...@calminferno.net Time：4/14/2012 17:15 To：fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org Subject：Re: [fossil-users] turning off gpg I believe when you create a new branch and you don't want to sign it you have to pass --nosign. -- James Turner ja...@calminferno.net ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] turning off gpg
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 05:28:41PM +0200, Marek wrote:
Yes it works, thanks!
It seems that fossil help branch doesn't list -nosign option. Also, when
clearsign is globally off shouldn't nosign be automatically turned on when
creating new branches?
just a thought,
Marek
The following patch make branch check the clearsign setting.
--
James Turner
ja...@calminferno.net
Index: src/branch.c
==
--- src/branch.c
+++ src/branch.c
@@ -52,11 +52,12 @@
if( g.argc5 ){
usage(new BRANCH-NAME CHECK-IN ?-bgcolor COLOR?);
}
db_find_and_open_repository(0, 0);
noSign = db_get_int(omitsign, 0)|noSign;
-
+ if( db_get_boolean(clearsign, 0)==0 ){ noSign = 1; }
+
/* fossil branch new name */
zBranch = g.argv[3];
if( zBranch==0 || zBranch[0]==0 ){
fossil_panic(branch name cannot be empty);
}
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Petr Ferdus petr...@centrum.cz wrote: Hello, I am trying to merge my local fossil repo with trunk and all I receive is message fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files. I thought it might be related to use of my patched version of fossil.exe but the same message appears with latest windows binary from fossil site. Previously, I have merged my local fossil repo literally hundred’s times so I am quite confused what might went wrong. I don't understand this either. The error is more of an assertion than something that a user ought to see - it is not suppose to ever occur and it indicates that something is wrong with the merge logic. As far as I know, it has never come up before. If you can figure out how to reproduce the problem, that would be a big help. I've seen this when merging from a more recent check in to an older check in. Checking out the newer version and merging the old version into it seemed to fix it. Rebuilding repo does not help. I know the message comes from pivot.c [ http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/artifact/01042d5f6?ln=87] as used in merge.c [ http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/artifact/0735646a51a?ln=167] Last time I pulled artifact from fossil canonical server I received a message *** time skew *** server is slow by 32.3 seconds. Could this lead to perceived problem? What else should I try to solve problem with merge? Thanks. Peter c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil ver This is fossil version 1.22 [5dd5d39e7c] 2012-03-19 12:45:47 UTC c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil rebu c:\soft\bin\myfossilclone.fossil 100.0% complete... c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil merge trunk c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossil\fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil merge --debug trunk c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossil\fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files
_ Od: Matt Welland estifo...@gmail.com Komu: Fossil SCM user's discussion fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org Datum: 14.04.2012 22:41 Předmět: Re: [fossil-users] fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Petr Ferdus petr...@centrum.cz wrote: Hello, I am trying to merge my local fossil repo with trunk and all I receive is message fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files. I thought it might be related to use of my patched version of fossil.exe but the same message appears with latest windows binary from fossil site. Previously, I have merged my local fossil repo literally hundred’s times so I am quite confused what might went wrong. I don't understand this either. The error is more of an assertion than something that a user ought to see - it is not suppose to ever occur and it indicates that something is wrong with the merge logic. As far as I know, it has never come up before. If you can figure out how to reproduce the problem, that would be a big help. I've seen this when merging from a more recent check in to an older check in. Checking out the newer version and merging the old version into it seemed to fix it. Thank you for the tip Matt. I could move on by updating checkout to trunk, then updating it back to my original branch. After that I was able to do fossil merge again without error message. In case of interest I have made some copies of my fossil repo (29MB), _fossil_ (10MB) and _fossil (12KB) files before merge (error manifesting), after merge and after commit of merged content. At moment I have no means how to put them online. Thanks Peter c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil update trunk c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil update PF_experimental c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil merge --debug trunk Rebuilding repo does not help. I know the message comes from pivot.c [ http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/artifact/01042d5f6?ln=87] as used in merge.c [ http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/artifact/0735646a51a?ln=167] Last time I pulled artifact from fossil canonical server I received a message *** time skew *** server is slow by 32.3 seconds. Could this lead to perceived problem? What else should I try to solve problem with merge? Thanks. Peter c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil ver This is fossil version 1.22 [5dd5d39e7c] 2012-03-19 12:45:47 UTC c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil rebu c:\soft\bin\myfossilclone.fossil 100.0% complete... c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil merge trunk c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossil\fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossilfossil merge --debug trunk c:\soft\msys\home\user\fossil\fossil.exe: lack both primary and secondary files ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
