[fossil-users] comparison with Git
I recall reading somewhere (can't seem to find it at the moment) that fossil is a "serverless, zero-administration" program. Is that true of git also? Thanks. --Russ P. -- 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] comparison with Git
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 00:13:43 -0700 Russ Paielli wrote: > I recall reading somewhere (can't seem to find it at the moment) that > fossil is a "serverless, zero-administration" program. Is that true > of git also? Thanks. Depends on how you define "serverless". Any distributed SCM (Fossil and Git included) is specifically designed to keep all the repository history on a local machine, so if by "serverless" you mean that an SCM do not need to contact a server to record a commit (or fetch history log or whatever else) then yes, both Fossil and Git are serverless, and so does every other DVCS out there. As to "zero-administration", this sounds more like a flame bite rather than a technical consideration: any DVCS system requires certain amount of administration around it. This might possibly refer to the fact Fossil is self-hosting -- you can transfer its binary to a machine, run it and it will serve the specified repository (or a set of them) all by itself as it includes a built-in web-server which is used for both web UI and data pushes/pulls. The real aspect in which Fossil shines, is that it provides a turn-key *integrated* solution consisting of an SCM (obviously), wiki, bug tracker, project documentation editing, and user database with access controls, all accessible/configurable via web UI, and all that is provided by a single 1.2M binary which only depends on libc, zlib and openssl (optionally). This really rocks for certain applications. You could read this classical post by Zed Shaw [1] explaining it all. 1. http://sheddingbikes.com/posts/1276624594.html ___ 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] comparison with Git
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Russ Paielli wrote: > I recall reading somewhere (can't seem to find it at the moment) that > fossil is a "serverless, zero-administration" program. Is that true of git > also? Thanks. We make that claim about the SQLite database engine. See http://www.sqlite.org/about.html Fossil is the DVCS used to manages the SQLite sources, and Fossil is built on top of SQLite. The homepages for Fossil and SQLite are hosted on the same machine. But Fossil and SQLite are not the same thing. > > --Russ P. > > -- > 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 > > -- 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] new files or modified files don't get updated on the remote server file system
Hi, I'm quite new to fossil and have some experience only with subversion. I've setup a little test system to check out if I can implement fossil into our workflow. I've a windows 2003 server where I've created a repository folder and I've have all the development files in a separate folder on the same machine e:\fossil\repo < this is the repository folder, which contains: 13/09/2012 12:2170,656 apptest.fossil e:\web\apptest < this is the development folder, which contains: 05/09/2012 13:0146 thisisatest.txt 05/09/2012 13:01 9,216 _FOSSIL_ The server is running as a service with the following parameters: e:\fossil\fossil.exe server --port 91 e:\fossil\repo\apptest.fossil so I'm not using it as CGI on IIS or Apache, but using its own internal web server. On my client machine I've created a folder on the desktop called apptest_local and from command shell I've cloned and downloaded the repository, so far so good and I had not problem whatsoever. I've then edited the local thisisatest.txt file and commited to the server, this also has worked as expected. I've made few commitments and also simulated another user to check out how merge conflicts are handled... so all in all everything went smoothly. The web server respond with no issues from the client machine and I can clearly see the timeline with all the commits and comments etc. Problem is that once I go on the server, while the repository file is updated (check date/time above) the actual text file in the development folder is untouched and still the original version when it was created in the first place. Now I'm sure I'm doing something wrong, but what? I've tried to search in google and on the mailing list but with no success. Anybody can shed some light? Thanks Cheers ___ 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] new files or modified files don't get updated on the remote server file system
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Tommaso D'Argenio wrote: > Problem is that once I go on the server, while the repository file is > updated (check date/time above) the actual text file in the development > folder > is untouched and still the original version when it was created in the > first place. > > The development folder on the server is no different from one of the development folders on the client. (Fossil doesn't know that one machine is a "client" and another is a "server". They are all just computers.) If user Alice checks in a change out of her development folder, you wouldn't expect user Bob's development folder to be automatically updated, would you? Bob needs to request that update (using "fossil update"). In the same way, you need to run "fossil update" on the development folder on the server, since that development folder is just another user, as far as Fossil is concerned. -- 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] new files or modified files don't get updated on the remote server file system
Hi Richard, thanks for your fast response. I got that, but then there is something I don't quite understand. In a normal scenario I would have a development server (call it remote machine), on which I have one repository for each of the application the team develops. Each repository have multiple branches like: testing, uat, development, production etc. So that the development team can work on the development of the application without touching the production and so on. Now think at this as a web development team, so we have a web application which doesn't need to be build or anything like that. The dev team create a new patch on their local repository and commit it to the remote testing branch. When they open up the browser to test it out, they won't be able to do it because the actual file in the remote repository it's the old one. The dev guy doesn't have the permission to log on the remote machine and manually run a fossil update, neither I can think of a process on the remote machine that run the fossil update command every second. For instance, I have a repository with SVN on the remote machine. I make some changes on my local repository (after the update done locally to incorporate changes made by other), and using TortoiseSVN I commit the changes and solve eventual conflicts with a merge. When this is done, I open up the web app on the browser and there it is my change. Am I making any sense ? thanks :) On 13 September 2012 13:34, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 8:28 AM, Tommaso D'Argenio wrote: > >> Problem is that once I go on the server, while the repository file is >> updated (check date/time above) the actual text file in the development >> folder >> is untouched and still the original version when it was created in the >> first place. >> >> > The development folder on the server is no different from one of the > development folders on the client. (Fossil doesn't know that one machine > is a "client" and another is a "server". They are all just computers.) If > user Alice checks in a change out of her development folder, you wouldn't > expect user Bob's development folder to be automatically updated, would > you? Bob needs to request that update (using "fossil update"). In the > same way, you need to run "fossil update" on the development folder on the > server, since that development folder is just another user, as far as > Fossil is concerned. > > > -- > 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 > > -- *Cheers,* *Tommaso.* *---* *Imagination is more important than knowledge. A.Einstein* ___ 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] new files or modified files don't get updated on the remote server file system
Hello Tommaso, > For instance, I have a repository with SVN on the remote machine. I make > some changes on my local repository (after the update done locally to > incorporate changes made by other), and using TortoiseSVN I commit the > changes and solve eventual conflicts with a merge. When this is done, I open > up the web app on the browser and there it is my change. The fundamental difference between SVN and Fossil is that the repository on your server is the "apptest.fossil" file and not what you have in "e:\web\apptest". That folder is only a checkout of the repository, so obviously it does not change, as Richard wrote you already. What you seem to be looking for is a commit hook to deploy your app after every commit. Petr ___ 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] new files or modified files don't get updated on the remote server file system
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:20:12 +0100 "Tommaso D'Argenio" wrote: [...] > Now think at this as a web development team, so we have a web > application which doesn't need to be build or anything like that. The > dev team create a new patch on their local repository and commit it > to the remote testing branch. When they open up the browser to test > it out, they won't be able to do it because the actual file in the > remote repository it's the old one. The dev guy doesn't have the > permission to log on the remote machine and manually run a fossil > update, neither I can think of a process on the remote machine that > run the fossil update command every second. > > For instance, I have a repository with SVN on the remote machine. I > make some changes on my local repository (after the update done > locally to incorporate changes made by other), and using TortoiseSVN > I commit the changes and solve eventual conflicts with a merge. When > this is done, I open up the web app on the browser and there it is my > change. > > Am I making any sense ? Not much: a Subversion repository on a server does not have an open checkout attached to it at all. So could you please describe in more details what you're trying to achieve? So far it seems you want to somehow automagically update certain open checkout of a Fossil repository after you push new changes to a specific branch in that repository. Is this true? Then how precisely this is implemented in your Subversion setup? I, for one, cannot really imagine this. Note that a Fossil repository can have any number of open checkouts active at the same time, all of them independent from each other. This should hint you at that Fossil kind of work "backwards" here: open checkouts refer to the repository, not the other way round. ___ 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] new files or modified files don't get updated on the remote server file system
Hi, I don't maintain the SVN server so I can't comment on the way it's configured. My workflow is quite simple: -Create a folder on my laptop -Right click on the folder > Tortoise > Checkout and enter the repository URL -at this point all files get downloaded -modify few things -Right click on the folder > Tortoise > Commit and enter comment -Resolve conflicts (eventually) -Done, new files and update files on the server When I have to work on the same repository, I just start with an Update and then follow the rest of the workflow. As Petr was saying, when I commit I want to see the file/s updated on the server (remote machine) also. How would you otherwise work on a project/software as a developer (client) with no means to access the server and launch an update from there ? I want to modify my local files, commit to the test server and ask other people to look at the changes. If they don't like it I can revert back to the previous version otherwise if they confirm I'll make the same commit to the production branch. By the way I've also checked the autosync setting and it is set to ON, on both machines. Reading from the documentation Fossil has two modes of operation: *"autosync"* and *"manual-merge"* Autosync mode is reminiscent of CVS or SVN in that it automatically keeps your changes in synchronization with your co-workers through the use of a central server. and the autosync workflow it's what I need, but somehow doesn't work. I pretty much did what's written here: http://www.fossil-scm.org/xfer/doc/trunk/www/concepts.wiki. Thanks. On 13 September 2012 14:43, Konstantin Khomoutov < flatw...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:20:12 +0100 > "Tommaso D'Argenio" wrote: > > [...] > > Now think at this as a web development team, so we have a web > > application which doesn't need to be build or anything like that. The > > dev team create a new patch on their local repository and commit it > > to the remote testing branch. When they open up the browser to test > > it out, they won't be able to do it because the actual file in the > > remote repository it's the old one. The dev guy doesn't have the > > permission to log on the remote machine and manually run a fossil > > update, neither I can think of a process on the remote machine that > > run the fossil update command every second. > > > > For instance, I have a repository with SVN on the remote machine. I > > make some changes on my local repository (after the update done > > locally to incorporate changes made by other), and using TortoiseSVN > > I commit the changes and solve eventual conflicts with a merge. When > > this is done, I open up the web app on the browser and there it is my > > change. > > > > Am I making any sense ? > > Not much: a Subversion repository on a server does not have an open > checkout attached to it at all. So could you please describe in more > details what you're trying to achieve? > > So far it seems you want to somehow automagically update certain open > checkout of a Fossil repository after you push new changes to a > specific branch in that repository. Is this true? > > Then how precisely this is implemented in your Subversion setup? > I, for one, cannot really imagine this. > > Note that a Fossil repository can have any number of open checkouts > active at the same time, all of them independent from each other. > This should hint you at that Fossil kind of work "backwards" here: open > checkouts refer to the repository, not the other way round. > -- *Cheers,* *Tommaso.* *---* *Imagination is more important than knowledge. A.Einstein* ___ 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] new files or modified files don't get updated on the remote server file system
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Tommaso D'Argenio wrote: > The dev guy doesn't have the permission to log on the remote machine and > manually run a fossil update, neither I can think of a process on the > remote machine that run the fossil update command every second. > If it were me, I'd add a CGI script (or the equivalent) to the website someplace where the dev guy could go and login and press a button and the script would then automatically run "fossil update". If you wanted to be really fancy, you could allow the dev guy to enter a specific version to update to, then have the script run "fossil update $VERSION". That way, the dev guy could load any historical version of the website he wanted to look at. --- If your website is just static content, then you can use Fossil's embedded documentation feature. See http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/trunk/www/embeddeddoc.wiki Notice the "trunk" term in the URL above. You can change that to a version name of any kind, including a ISO8601 date in order to see historical copies of the document. For example, this is what the Fossil homepage looked like on 2011-01-01: http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/2011-01-01/www/index.wiki But the embedded documentation feature will only help you if you are serving static content directly from the Fossil engine 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] Support for Win9x?
Is there any reason to try to keep Fossil working on windows9x? Is there anybody out there who continues to develop and/or support projects on windows9x? If we can abandon support for windows9x, it will simplify the code and allow us to be more productive in working on new features. -- 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] Support for Win9x?
On 09/13/12 16:02, Richard Hipp wrote: > Is there any reason to try to keep Fossil working on windows9x? I don't think much Win9x development goes on today. But even if I'm wrong, I would guess that the intersection between the sets "Win9X developers" and "Fossil users" is roughly empty. Tag last win95-compatible version so anyone so inclined can dig it up easily, just in case? -- Kind regards, Jan Danielsson signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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] Support for Win9x?
Even if someone is still supporting Win9X, it does not necessarily follow that they are doing anything more that testing binaries in that environment. I would not be heartbroken if such support were removed. SDR On Sep 13, 2012 8:25 AM, "Jan Danielsson" wrote: > On 09/13/12 16:02, Richard Hipp wrote: > > Is there any reason to try to keep Fossil working on windows9x? > >I don't think much Win9x development goes on today. But even if I'm > wrong, I would guess that the intersection between the sets "Win9X > developers" and "Fossil users" is roughly empty. > >Tag last win95-compatible version so anyone so inclined can dig it up > easily, just in case? > > -- > Kind regards, > Jan Danielsson > > > > ___ > 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] new files or modified files don't get updated on the remote server file system
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Tommaso D'Argenio wrote: > > > just to add to this. I've set the remote-url with the correct server url > and a user with developer permissions (at later stage I've also added admin > and setup permissions, thinking that developer wasn't enough but no > changes), and when I do commit I can see that fossil is sending data to the > remote server via the autosync function I guess. > I think you may be confusing the repository on the server with the check-out on the server. Those are two different things. The sync updates the repository on the server, but it doesn't touch the check-out on the server. And that is by design and as it should be. There are no previsions in Fossil for updating a remote check-out. -- 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] Support for Win9x?
On 13/09/2012, at 9:02 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > Is there any reason to try to keep Fossil working on windows9x? Only if you are a technonecrophiliac Steve ___ 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] new files or modified files don't get updated on the remote server file system
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:04:58 +0100 "Tommaso D'Argenio" wrote: > > By the way I've also checked the autosync setting and it is set to > > ON, on both machines. Reading from the documentation [...] > just to add to this. I've set the remote-url with the correct server > url and a user with developer permissions (at later stage I've also > added admin and setup permissions, thinking that developer wasn't > enough but no changes), and when I do commit I can see that fossil is > sending data to the remote server via the autosync function I guess. [...] > What I'm doing is what it's written in the documentation as autosync > workflow, yet it doesn't work. I'll probably just give up :( I fail to see a problem statement here. Autosync means that each time your commit, Fossil contacts the remote repo and sees if the branch you're about to commit has been updated by someone other's commit(s), and if it is, the contents is fetched and you're requested to first do local merge and then re-try the push. Otherwise, a fork would occur (a branch with two leaves). You demonstrated that autosync works, so what's the problem? ___ 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] new files or modified files don't get updated on the remote server file system
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:57:03 +0100 "Tommaso D'Argenio" wrote: > I don't maintain the SVN server so I can't comment on the way it's > configured. That's probably important -- see below. > My workflow is quite simple: [...] > -Right click on the folder > Tortoise > Commit and enter comment > -Resolve conflicts (eventually) > -Done, new files and update files on the server Okay, this most probably means your repository has a so-called "commit hook" which performs deployment of the checked in changes after each commit is recorded. A hook is usually a shell script (but it might be any program at all) which is run by the SCM server software after a specific event happens (a commit in this case). AFAIK stock Fossil does not support hooks, but they can be possibly implemented in a special build, see [1]. A much simpler way, as Richard have already proposed, might be to deploy a no-brainer CGI script which would perform the deployment. In the simplest form that could be a form with a button; in a more elaborate case -- an entry for the revision (defaulting to the name of some branch) to check out and the button. The only problem I observe with this setup is possible permissions issue: the credentials used by your web server should provide read access to the relevant repository file (may be even write access for SQLite locking to work -- I don't know this stuff to this level of detail, sorry). 1. http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/pipermail/fossil-users/2012-February/008221.html ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
I'm using fossil 1.23 on Windows 7. I'm attempting to store text files generated by Microsoft SQL Server 2012 in fossil so I can easily track their changes over time. The problem is that fossil thinks these generated text files are binary data which prevents me from viewing the files via the web ui and generating diffs. When I look at these files in a hex edtor, I see this: ff fe 53 00 45 00 54 00 20 00 41 00. A text editor shows "SET A". I've looked in the email list archive where DRH specifies that a null character or a line longer than 8192 chars. The entire file is 1074 bytes so it's not the length. Is fossil reading the 00 bytes as nulls? Any idea why fossil thinks these files are binary? And, more importantly, what encoding I can specify to prevent this? I've tried various permutations of ASCII, UTF8, UTF7 to no effect. Thanks, Kevin ___ 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] trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Kevin Greiner wrote: > > I'm using fossil 1.23 on Windows 7. I'm attempting to store text files > generated by Microsoft SQL Server 2012 in fossil so I can easily track > their changes over time. > > The problem is that fossil thinks these generated text files are binary > data which prevents me from viewing the files via the web ui and generating > diffs. > > When I look at these files in a hex edtor, I see this: ff fe 53 00 45 00 > 54 00 20 00 41 00. A text editor shows "SET A". > > I've looked in the email list archive where DRH specifies that a null > character or a line longer than 8192 chars. The entire file is 1074 bytes > so it's not the length. Is fossil reading the 00 bytes as nulls? > > Any idea why fossil thinks these files are binary? And, more importantly, > what encoding I can specify to prevent this? I've tried various > permutations of ASCII, UTF8, UTF7 to no effect. > The file itself appears to be in utf16le. The "diff" facilities in Fossil currently only know how to deal with utf8. > > Thanks, > > Kevin > > ___ > 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] trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > The file itself appears to be in utf16le. The "diff" facilities in Fossil > currently only know how to deal with utf8. > Thanks, that was helpful. Turns out I was piping the output through another utility (powershell) that was turning the text into Unicode by default. ___ 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 enhancement idea. Was: trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Kevin Greiner wrote: > >> >> I'm using fossil 1.23 on Windows 7. I'm attempting to store text files >> generated by Microsoft SQL Server 2012 in fossil so I can easily track >> their changes over time. >> >> The problem is that fossil thinks these generated text files are binary >> data which prevents me from viewing the files via the web ui and generating >> diffs. >> >> When I look at these files in a hex edtor, I see this: ff fe 53 00 45 00 >> 54 00 20 00 41 00. A text editor shows "SET A". >> >> I've looked in the email list archive where DRH specifies that a null >> character or a line longer than 8192 chars. The entire file is 1074 bytes >> so it's not the length. Is fossil reading the 00 bytes as nulls? >> >> Any idea why fossil thinks these files are binary? And, more importantly, >> what encoding I can specify to prevent this? I've tried various >> permutations of ASCII, UTF8, UTF7 to no effect. >> > > The file itself appears to be in utf16le. The "diff" facilities in Fossil > currently only know how to deal with utf8. > It would be an interesting project to enhance Fossil so that it could support UTF16 in addition to UTF8. What would be needed is an algorithm to detect when a file was UTF16. (The BOM at the beginning of Kevin's example ought to be a big hint.) Then automatically call a convert routine to generate UTF8 prior to passing the content into the diff logic, or into the wiki engine, or prior to display on the UTF8 webpage, etc. Basically, we need a routine that converts an in-memory buffer from UTF16 to UTF8, and leaves anything that isn't UTF16 unchanged. Then we need to call that routine in a few strategic places inside of Fossil Volunteers to write that routine? I'll help identify the places where it needs to be called. > > >> >> Thanks, >> >> Kevin >> >> ___ >> 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 > -- 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] trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 03:43:16PM -0400, Kevin Greiner wrote: > I'm using fossil 1.23 on Windows 7. I'm attempting to store text files > generated by Microsoft SQL Server 2012 in fossil so I can easily track > their changes over time. > > The problem is that fossil thinks these generated text files are binary > data which prevents me from viewing the files via the web ui and generating > diffs. > > When I look at these files in a hex edtor, I see this: ff fe 53 00 45 00 54 > 00 20 00 41 00. A text editor shows "SET A". This is a BOM (Byte-Order Mark) [1] followed by five UTF-16-encoded characters comprising the string "SET A". > I've looked in the email list archive where DRH specifies that a null > character or a line longer than 8192 chars. The entire file is 1074 bytes > so it's not the length. Is fossil reading the 00 bytes as nulls? > > Any idea why fossil thinks these files are binary? And, more importantly, > what encoding I can specify to prevent this? I've tried various > permutations of ASCII, UTF8, UTF7 to no effect. UTF-8 should be fine. I dunno why fossil would consider an UTF-8-encoded file as binary for byte sequences representing non-NUL characters (including BOM) in UTF-8 do not contain zero bytes. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byte_order_mark ___ 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 enhancement idea. Was: trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
I'd like to assist with that contribution. Assuming someone hasn't already done it by the time I click send. :) SDR On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Kevin Greiner wrote: >> >>> >>> I'm using fossil 1.23 on Windows 7. I'm attempting to store text files >>> generated by Microsoft SQL Server 2012 in fossil so I can easily track >>> their changes over time. >>> >>> The problem is that fossil thinks these generated text files are binary >>> data which prevents me from viewing the files via the web ui and generating >>> diffs. >>> >>> When I look at these files in a hex edtor, I see this: ff fe 53 00 45 >>> 00 54 00 20 00 41 00. A text editor shows "SET A". >>> >>> I've looked in the email list archive where DRH specifies that a null >>> character or a line longer than 8192 chars. The entire file is 1074 bytes >>> so it's not the length. Is fossil reading the 00 bytes as nulls? >>> >>> Any idea why fossil thinks these files are binary? And, more >>> importantly, what encoding I can specify to prevent this? I've tried >>> various permutations of ASCII, UTF8, UTF7 to no effect. >>> >> >> The file itself appears to be in utf16le. The "diff" facilities in >> Fossil currently only know how to deal with utf8. >> > > It would be an interesting project to enhance Fossil so that it could > support UTF16 in addition to UTF8. What would be needed is an algorithm to > detect when a file was UTF16. (The BOM at the beginning of Kevin's example > ought to be a big hint.) Then automatically call a convert routine to > generate UTF8 prior to passing the content into the diff logic, or into the > wiki engine, or prior to display on the UTF8 webpage, etc. > > Basically, we need a routine that converts an in-memory buffer from UTF16 > to UTF8, and leaves anything that isn't UTF16 unchanged. Then we need to > call that routine in a few strategic places inside of Fossil > > Volunteers to write that routine? I'll help identify the places where it > needs to be called. > > >> >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Kevin >>> >>> ___ >>> 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 >> > > > > -- > 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 enhancement idea. Was: trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Kevin Greiner wrote: >>> >>> >>> I'm using fossil 1.23 on Windows 7. I'm attempting to store text files >>> generated by Microsoft SQL Server 2012 in fossil so I can easily track their >>> changes over time. >>> >>> The problem is that fossil thinks these generated text files are binary >>> data which prevents me from viewing the files via the web ui and generating >>> diffs. >>> >>> When I look at these files in a hex edtor, I see this: ff fe 53 00 45 00 >>> 54 00 20 00 41 00. A text editor shows "SET A". >>> >>> I've looked in the email list archive where DRH specifies that a null >>> character or a line longer than 8192 chars. The entire file is 1074 bytes so >>> it's not the length. Is fossil reading the 00 bytes as nulls? >>> >>> Any idea why fossil thinks these files are binary? And, more importantly, >>> what encoding I can specify to prevent this? I've tried various permutations >>> of ASCII, UTF8, UTF7 to no effect. >> >> >> The file itself appears to be in utf16le. The "diff" facilities in Fossil >> currently only know how to deal with utf8. > > > It would be an interesting project to enhance Fossil so that it could > support UTF16 in addition to UTF8. What would be needed is an algorithm to > detect when a file was UTF16. (The BOM at the beginning of Kevin's example > ought to be a big hint.) Then automatically call a convert routine to > generate UTF8 prior to passing the content into the diff logic, or into the > wiki engine, or prior to display on the UTF8 webpage, etc. > > Basically, we need a routine that converts an in-memory buffer from UTF16 to > UTF8, and leaves anything that isn't UTF16 unchanged. Then we need to call > that routine in a few strategic places inside of Fossil > > Volunteers to write that routine? I'll help identify the places where it > needs to be called. > I guess this could help to write such routine: http://unicode.org/faq/utf_bom.html -- Martin G. ___ 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 enhancement idea. Was: trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
On 13/09/12 21:08, Richard Hipp wrote:
[...]
> Basically, we need a routine that converts an in-memory buffer from
> UTF16 to UTF8, and leaves anything that isn't UTF16 unchanged. Then we
> need to call that routine in a few strategic places inside of Fossil
Could you clarify what you mean by 'leaves anything that isn't UTF-16
unchanged'? Do you mean you just want it to convert up until the point
where it finds non-well-formed UTF-16 and then tells you where it
stopped, or do you actually want to leave the unconverted UTF-16 in the
output file? Because that last will just produce gibberish ---
non-well-formed UTF-8.
The standard way to do all these conversions is just to call out to
iconv, which handles all the horrible edge cases. It is available for
Windows, but it's not small.
OTOH if you don't care about the edge cases, converting well-formed
UTF-16 to UTF-8 is lossless and pretty straightforward.
--
┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ─ http://www.cowlark.com ─
│
│ life←{ ↑1 ⍵∨.^3 4=+/,¯1 0 1∘.⊖¯1 0 1∘.⌽⊂⍵ }
│ --- Conway's Game Of Life, in one line of APL
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
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] comparison with Git
OK, so apparently I misunderstood in thinking that the "serverless, zero-administration" claim applies to Fossil. Thanks for the clarification. If it were true, and if it distinguished Fossil from Git, I would have used it in my advocacy of Fossil. I am sold on the idea that Fossil is superior to Git on the basis of simplicity alone. Than again, I am currently a minimal Fossil user. Being an aero engineer rather than a developer per se, I'd rather not spend time learning Git. The problem, as I have said before here, is that Git seems to be the de facto standard for open-source software. So not knowing Git essentially shuts you out of most open source. In addition, I feed slightly uncomfortable forcing someone who already knows Git to learn Fossil in order to work on my project. But maybe I shouldn't worry about that. As I said before, it would be great if Fossil could interact with Git at a push/pull level, but as I recall there are technical obstacles to that idea. I am not trying to open up that can of worms again, although maybe I just did. --Russ P. On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Russ Paielli wrote: > >> I recall reading somewhere (can't seem to find it at the moment) that >> fossil is a "serverless, zero-administration" program. Is that true of git >> also? Thanks. > > > We make that claim about the SQLite database engine. See > > http://www.sqlite.org/about.html > > Fossil is the DVCS used to manages the SQLite sources, and Fossil is built > on top of SQLite. The homepages for Fossil and SQLite are hosted on the > same machine. But Fossil and SQLite are not the same thing. > > >> >> --Russ P. >> >> -- >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > 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 > > -- 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] Fossil enhancement idea. Was: trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
I assumed (dangerous though it may be) that "leaves anything that isn't
UTF-16 unchanged" meant "don't convert any buffer to UTF-8 if the
origination buffer is not UTF-16".
SDR
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 5:04 PM, David Given wrote:
> On 13/09/12 21:08, Richard Hipp wrote:
> [...]
> > Basically, we need a routine that converts an in-memory buffer from
> > UTF16 to UTF8, and leaves anything that isn't UTF16 unchanged. Then we
> > need to call that routine in a few strategic places inside of Fossil
>
> Could you clarify what you mean by 'leaves anything that isn't UTF-16
> unchanged'? Do you mean you just want it to convert up until the point
> where it finds non-well-formed UTF-16 and then tells you where it
> stopped, or do you actually want to leave the unconverted UTF-16 in the
> output file? Because that last will just produce gibberish ---
> non-well-formed UTF-8.
>
> The standard way to do all these conversions is just to call out to
> iconv, which handles all the horrible edge cases. It is available for
> Windows, but it's not small.
>
> OTOH if you don't care about the edge cases, converting well-formed
> UTF-16 to UTF-8 is lossless and pretty straightforward.
>
> --
> ┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ─ http://www.cowlark.com ─
> │
> │ life←{ ↑1 ⍵∨.^3 4=+/,¯1 0 1∘.⊖¯1 0 1∘.⌽⊂⍵ }
> │ --- Conway's Game Of Life, in one line of APL
>
>
> ___
> 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 enhancement idea. Was: trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
You assume correctly. The use of iconv won't do, though, since everything also needs to work on Unix. There are small, portable conversion routines in SQLite that you can copy. D. Richard Hipp - d...@sqlite.org Sent from phone - pardon brevity On Sep 13, 2012 7:44 PM, "Scott Robison" wrote: I assumed (dangerous though it may be) that "leaves anything that isn't UTF-16 unchanged" meant "don't convert any buffer to UTF-8 if the origination buffer is not UTF-16". SDR On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 5:04 PM, David Given wrote: > > > > On 13/09/12 21:08, Richard Hipp wrote: > > [...] > > > Basically, we need a routine that converts an... > > > ___ > > fossil-users mailing list > > fossil-users@lists.f... > ___ 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 enhancement idea. Was: trouble handling text files from SQL Server 2012
So I've spent some time writing a small and I think portable routine to detect if a buffer is a valid UTF-16 (either little or big endian). It rejects buffers if they contain an odd number of bytes or contain any of the 66 non-character code-points or have invalid surrogate usage. While this seems to work well on the handful of binary files I've tested it against, I'm curious as to whether it would be desired to additionally use some or all of the current binary file detection criteria? My thought being that a file could be perfectly valid UTF-16 but have an extremely long line or (worse in my opinion) embedded non-text characters (particularly U+ or non-white-space control codes). SDR On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > You assume correctly. > > The use of iconv won't do, though, since everything also needs to work on > Unix. There are small, portable conversion routines in SQLite that you can > copy. > > D. Richard Hipp - d...@sqlite.org > Sent from phone - pardon brevity > > On Sep 13, 2012 7:44 PM, "Scott Robison" wrote: > > I assumed (dangerous though it may be) that "leaves anything that isn't > UTF-16 unchanged" meant "don't convert any buffer to UTF-8 if the > origination buffer is not UTF-16". > > SDR > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 5:04 PM, David Given wrote: > >> > >> > On 13/09/12 21:08, Richard Hipp wrote: >> > [...] >> > > Basically, we need a routine that converts an... >> >> > ___ >> > fossil-users mailing list >> > fossil-users@lists.f... >> > > > ___ > 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
