Re: [fossil-users] Merge question
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Andy Goth wrote: > whatever was going on. Might want to explicitly turn on more warnings > like -Wunused or -Wall or even -Wextra to help spot these types of issues.) > Sidebar: i tried -Wall with fossil years ago but it didn't like sqlite3's use of "long long", which isn't C89 (i'm not even sure it's C99, but it's apparently supported by all compilers). -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf ___ 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] Amended check-in time
Thus said Richard Hipp on Mon, 25 Sep 2017 16:04:32 -0400: > It does work sometimes, at least: https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/info/1f378f9e3 I've seen it work before too, so I'm not sure why it would be different with the steps Andy Goth provided. Guess it will take some investigation... Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 400059c9d935 ___ 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] How to find out when a line was removed
On 9/25/17, John P. Rouillard wrote: > > So do I need the exact revision where the line existed, or do I just > need a revision earlier than when I think the line was last deleted? > Any version prior to where the line was deleted. The reverse annotation will tell you the next subsequent version where that line was edited in any way. That next change might not be the spot where the line was finally deleted. It might have just been modified. In that case, just repeat the process with the subsequent version until you find the exact version where the line was deleted. -- 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] How to find out when a line was removed
On 9/25/17, John P. Rouillard wrote: >> >>Example: The line at >>https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/annotate?origin=trunk&filename=src/diff.c&checkin=d9ef474a1 >>is missing from trunk. To find out where it was deleted, use the >>following URL: >> >>https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/annotate?origin=trunk&filename=src/diff.c&checkin=d9ef474a1 > > Umm these two url's look the same except for the www. > Yes. That was copy/paste error. The text should read something like this: Example: The line at https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/artifact/2bc1234c?ln=49 is missing from trunk. To find out where it was deleted, use the following URL: https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/annotate?origin=trunk&checkin=d9ef474a&filename=src/diff.c -- 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] Amended check-in time
On 9/25/17, Andy Bradford wrote: > Thus said Andy Goth on Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:45:23 -0500: > >> Has anyone tried running these commands yet? I want to see if anyone >> else can replicate my problem. > > I just tried and was able to reproduce the problem. It happens on > rebuild whether one does it via the ``fossil amend'' command or using > the ``fossil ui'' to edit the checkin. It does work sometimes, at least: https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/info/1f378f9e3 I did a rebuild after entering the change above. -- 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] Amended check-in time
Thus said Andy Goth on Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:45:23 -0500: > Has anyone tried running these commands yet? I want to see if anyone > else can replicate my problem. I just tried and was able to reproduce the problem. It happens on rebuild whether one does it via the ``fossil amend'' command or using the ``fossil ui'' to edit the checkin. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 400059c95c75 ___ 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] Amended check-in time
Thus said Andy Goth on Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:45:23 -0500: > Has anyone tried running these commands yet? I want to see if anyone > else can replicate my problem. Sorry, I misinterpreted your comment about having a bad timezone (except in Narnia) as a retraction of your original problem. And now you've issued a correction... Guess I'll have to try it now. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 400059c9590e ___ 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] How to find out when a line was removed
On 9/23/17, John P. Rouillard wrote: > > I am trying to find out when a line dissapeared from a file. > As of the latest version of Fossil (checked into trunk moments ago) you can do this: fossil annotate $filename -r $oldversion -o trunk $filename is the name of the file and $oldversion is some version identifier (a label or a hash prefix) for a check-in that contains the line that you are wondering about. The "-o trunk" object is the new magic. The output shows first time each line of the file changes in the sequence of check-ins going from $oldversion to trunk. (You can, of course, substitute some other version identifier for "trunk", depending on your needs.) Note that the first change to the line in question might not be the specific change that deleted the line. Instead it might just be an edit of that line. You might need to iterate the find the deletion point, just as you would have to iterate to find the insertion point for a line using an ordinary annotation. The same feature is available for the /annotate webpage, except that you use the "origin=trunk" query parameter. You'll have to type in the URL manually, as there is currently no hyperlink that provides the "origin=" query parameter for you. Example: The line at https://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/annotate?origin=trunk&filename=src/diff.c&checkin=d9ef474a1 is missing from trunk. To find out where it was deleted, use the following URL: https://fossil-scm.org/fossil/annotate?origin=trunk&filename=src/diff.c&checkin=d9ef474a1 -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Using Fossil with Apache Proxy
On 9/25/17, David Mason wrote: > I am trying things differently this year. I want to use one instance of > fossil running proxied behind a firewall. I have the following in my > Apache conf file: > > > ProxyPass http://127.0.0.1:8081 > > ProxyPassReverse http://127.0.0.1:8081 > > SetOutputFilter proxy-html > > ProxyHTMLURLMap http://127.0.0.1:8081 /fossil > > > > RewriteRule ^/fossil$ /fossil/ [R] > and the forward proxy works, except the resulting page doesn't have the CSS > and all the links are 127.0.0.1:8081 links instead of the right ones. > How are you starting up the fossil server? Are you using the --baseurl option so that Fossil knows how to construct URLs that point to itself? -- 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] Using Fossil with Apache Proxy
I am trying things differently this year. I want to use one instance of fossil running proxied behind a firewall. I have the following in my Apache conf file: ProxyPass http://127.0.0.1:8081 ProxyPassReverse http://127.0.0.1:8081 SetOutputFilter proxy-html ProxyHTMLURLMap http://127.0.0.1:8081 /fossil RewriteRule ^/fossil$ /fossil/ [R] and the forward proxy works, except the resulting page doesn't have the CSS and all the links are 127.0.0.1:8081 links instead of the right ones. Further, when I try to clone these via: fossil clone https://dma...@cps506.scs.ryerson.ca/fossil/f2017/A-dmason_ryerson.ca.fossil cps506.fossil it always fails (after asking for password, which I just set). I'm certainly doing something silly wrong. All help appreciated! Thanks ../Dave ___ 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] Amended check-in time
On 09/21/17 20:48, Andy Goth wrote: On 09/21/17 19:51, Richard Hipp wrote: I don't have any idea [why] the tags are not working for you. Try this sequence: f new repo.fossil mkdir ckout cd ckout f open ../repo.fossil touch xxx f add xxx f commit -date-override 2018-01-01 -m 'add xxx' sleep 5 TIME=$(date +%FT%T) sleep 5 f rm -hard xxx f commit -allow-older -m 'remove xxx' f timeline f amend -date "$TIME" prev f timeline f rebuild f timeline Has anyone tried running these commands yet? I want to see if anyone else can replicate my problem. Correction: Replace "date +%FT%T" with "date -u +%FT%T" to avoid timezone problems. -- Andy Goth | ___ 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] Merge question
On 09/25/17 10:39, Richard Hipp wrote: On 9/25/17, Andy Goth wrote: As far as I can tell, in the general case I described in my previous email, assuming waiting was not an option, the best to do would have been to explicitly specify the -baseline option when merging the child branch and later when merging its parent branch. But this MUST be done in combination with additional testing to confirm that the child branch wasn't actually dependent on anything in its parent branch. And of course the final merge also must be tested to confirm it didn't leave anything out due to -baseline being forgotten or mistyped. Thoughts? I was thinking of changing --baseline so that it records the merge baseline using a Q card instead of a P card, as if the merge were a cherrypick. Not a bad idea at all. This avoids the second part of the problem quite nicely. If I recall correctly, the Q card supports listing a range of merged check-ins even though this feature is never actually used in practice. As for the user desire that a merge arrow be shown, I feel this would best be addressed by showing cherrypick and backout merges. I wrote up this wishlist item eons ago but never got around to working on it. Does anyone have any new ideas about this? How should such alternative merge arrows be rendered? Colors? Can dashed lines be shown? Can the arrowhead be a symbol such as a tiny circle or an X? -- Andy Goth | ___ 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] Merge question
On 9/25/17, Andy Goth wrote: > As far as I can tell, in the general case I described in my previous > email, assuming waiting was not an option, the best to do would have > been to explicitly specify the -baseline option when merging the child > branch and later when merging its parent branch. But this MUST be done > in combination with additional testing to confirm that the child branch > wasn't actually dependent on anything in its parent branch. And of > course the final merge also must be tested to confirm it didn't leave > anything out due to -baseline being forgotten or mistyped. Thoughts? I was thinking of changing --baseline so that it records the merge baseline using a Q card instead of a P card, as if the merge were a cherrypick. -- 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] Tech note search
On 09/25/17 09:35, Chris Rydalch wrote: Thanks so much Andy, this is great! So far so good on my end... Merged to trunk, along with all the other recent developments. Please update and test some more, if you don't mind. -- Andy Goth | ___ 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] Merge question
On 09/25/17 10:18, Richard Hipp wrote: On 9/25/17, Andy Goth wrote: In response to Chris Rydalch saying that search-technote works for him, in combination with it passing all my tests, I'd like to merge it to trunk. What is the correct procedure for doing so? At this point I'm inclined to just be patient and let annotation-enhancements be merged first. That would solve everything. Merged now. Thank you for your testing and your corrections. I don't have access to any Ubuntu systems, so I didn't spot the original problem you came across. (No clue why Ubuntu has -Werror on by default, or whatever was going on. Might want to explicitly turn on more warnings like -Wunused or -Wall or even -Wextra to help spot these types of issues.) As far as I can tell, in the general case I described in my previous email, assuming waiting was not an option, the best to do would have been to explicitly specify the -baseline option when merging the child branch and later when merging its parent branch. But this MUST be done in combination with additional testing to confirm that the child branch wasn't actually dependent on anything in its parent branch. And of course the final merge also must be tested to confirm it didn't leave anything out due to -baseline being forgotten or mistyped. Thoughts? -- Andy Goth | ___ 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] Merge question
On 9/25/17, Andy Goth wrote: > In response to Chris Rydalch saying that search-technote works for him, > in combination with it passing all my tests, I'd like to merge it to trunk. > > What is the correct procedure for doing so? > > At this point I'm inclined to just be patient and let > annotation-enhancements be merged first. That would solve everything. > Merged now. -- 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] Merge question
In response to Chris Rydalch saying that search-technote works for him, in combination with it passing all my tests, I'd like to merge it to trunk. What is the correct procedure for doing so? If I do: $ f up trunk $ f merge search-technote -baseline root:search-technote -integrate Then any future merge of annotation-enhancements will omit all changes made 2017-09-23 because the merge record will show that they were already merged due to being in the baseline of search-technote. To correct, said future merge would have to explicitly use the -baseline root:annotation-enhancements option. Instead I could cherrypick each of the five check-ins comprising the search-technote branch. This would avoid the aforementioned problem but, in addition to being a pain in the butt to do, would also not put a merge arrow in the graph. Of course, while said merge arrow is nice to see, its existence is responsible for said problem. A third approach would be to construct an alternative annotation-enhancements branch made by cherrypicking each of the search-technote check-ins, but this new branch would be rooted on trunk. Then merge that branch and be done. What's the best way to handle this situation? While on this subject, there are also a number of other changes on the annotation-enhancements branch that are unrelated to annotations. What do we do with them? At this point I'm inclined to just be patient and let annotation-enhancements be merged first. That would solve everything. Yet, my question remains. What is the best way to handle merging a branch-to-a-branch back to trunk without immediately incorporating unrelated branch changes while still allowing said changes to be incorporated when the branch is later merged? -- Andy Goth | ___ 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] Tech note search
Thanks so much Andy, this is great! So far so good on my end... On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 12:11 AM, Andy Goth wrote: > I implemented tech note search capability on the search-technote branch. > Please have a look and let me know if it's good. Maybe the way I named > things isn't so great, I dunno, so feel free to fix style or other > conventions. If it's good, go ahead and integrate it to trunk. > > I opted to keep tech note searching largely separate from wiki searching > because I feel tech notes serve a significantly different purpose. > > -- > Andy Goth | > ___ > 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