[gitorious] Re: Snapshot Support
On Jan 8, 5:22 pm, Steven Sroka sroka.ste...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 January 2011 03:13, Marius Mårnes Mathiesen You couldn't just use git to pull the repository? git would be used, but the compressed tarball would be quicker to download if the maintainer of the script I was talking about could program the script to download the tarball first. For efficiencies sake .) Btw, I keep getting this error when I try to clone the Qt repo that I need, # kdesrc-build running: 'git' 'clone' '-v' '--' 'git://gitorious.org/+kde-developers/qt/kde-qt.git' '/home/steven/kdesrc/qt-copy' Initialized empty Git repository in /home/steven/kdesrc/qt-copy/.git/ fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly fatal: early EOF fatal: index-pack failed Do you know why Gitorious keeps dropping the connection? I am the developer of the script Steven is mentioning (kdesrc-build). The problem he has is essentially just that the git clone (not pull, which works ok) for large modules hosted on gitorious.org times out. I had Googled information on this last year (http://lists-archives.org/ git/700614-cannot-clone-redirecting-stdout.html) and instituted a simple workaround in kdesrc-build to simply leave qt-copy's git-clone procedure output to the terminal instead of redirecting it to a log file. The -v flag is also passed for this purpose. I did not report a bug since it appears you all were already aware of the effect. Apparently the workaround is not working in Steven's case however. (I have not had occasion to test re-cloning Qt since, and I'm not particularly eager to start now ;) kdesrc-build includes support for Subversion module bootstrapping via tarball snapshots, which wouldn't be hard to retrofit onto your Git checkouts, which is why I mentioned that as a possibility. Other workarounds are probably acceptable too, just let me know. Ideally if the tarball option is used screen-scraping would not be required to figure out a specific sha1 to download (i.e. it should ideally be possible to download based off of a branch or tag name from the client end) I'm tracking this at KDE bug 262145 (https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi? id=262145) but I should be receiving replies to this thread as well if you just want to keep the discussion on this group. Thanks for any tips! Regards, - Michael Pyne -- To post to this group, send email to gitorious@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to gitorious+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Re: [gitorious] Re: Infamous Byte Code Issue...
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 1:59 AM, Eric Ryan Jones gig...@gmail.com wrote: Mmm i also get it when i try to login... and now that i've logged out i'm really in a pickle /opt/gitorious/gitorious/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/ routing/route_set.rb:437:in `call' Eric, I'm not sure what the context is of this exact message, but it sounds a little similar to the problem that occurs if one has the i18n gem installed when running Gitorious. The i18n gem is incompatible with the Rails version Gitorious is running; and it should be OK to remove it (newer Rails apps will use Bundler, which should install its gems non-globally). As for your 1.9.1 issues: on Gitorious.org we reverted to using 1.8.7 because these errors would occur every now and then. Ruby 1.9.2 should be better and may solve your problems; otherwise I'd recommend running 1.8.7. Cheers, - Marius -- To post to this group, send email to gitorious@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to gitorious+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Re: [gitorious] Re: SSL Only
Hi, gitorious.org will be moving to SSL-only in January, so expect mainline to receive the required changes soon-ish. I currently don't know what exact changes are needed, thus unable to help you out with your problems, but I'll post an update as soon as I've landed the fix. Cheers, Christian On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 14:26, Vernon Chapman chapman...@gmail.com wrote: I have the same requirement of running Girorious on a private server using SSL only. I was wondering if anyone had successes with this. Thanks On Dec 17, 2010, at 7:46 AM, ShaneOG shane.ogr...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Marius, That didn't work either. I ended up with a redirect loop. -Shane On Dec 16, 12:48 pm, Marius Mårnes Mathiesen marius.mathie...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 5:11 PM, ShaneOG shane.ogr...@gmail.com wrote: This didn't work :( I applied the patch, disabled my gitorious (non-SSL) apache site and restarted Apache. As a result accessing the app on port 80 fails, and accessing on port 443 via https I get redirected to the (now non-existant) app on port 80. :( Do I need to do anything else apart from applying this patch? You may have to set up a vhost on port 80 that redirects all requests to use SSL. Cheers, - Marius -- To post to this group, send email to gitorious@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to gitorious+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgitorious%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com -- To post to this group, send email to gitorious@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to gitorious+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgitorious%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com -- MVH Christian -- To post to this group, send email to gitorious@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to gitorious+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
