On 16 Jul 2005 12:25:17 +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
>
> > - Works with tla 1.3.1 and newer. closes: #318220.
>
> With tla from unstable, I still get :
>
> [2005-Jul-16 12:22:03] executing: 'tla' '--version'
> [2005-Jul-16 12:22:03] Unexpected 'tla --version' output
>
> ii archzoom 0.5
On 28 May 2005 15:59:35 +0200, Jeremy Laine wrote:
>
> The latest example I have is over 400 ",get.,,arch-tree-*" directories
> occupying 60Mb in one hour and bringing my mail server to a halt in
> the process! I will extract the corresponding logs.
The ",get.*" dirs (unlike ,,arch-{tree,cset} di
On 28 May 2005 12:27:17 +0100, Jeremy Laine wrote:
>
> On 2 servers already I have noticed that /tmp progressively fills up with
> temporary Arch directories belonging to www-data when using archzoom. I
> am not sure what is causing this behaviour, as I am not able to
> "manually" (i.e by browsing
On 16 May 2005 20:31:36 +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
>
> Instead of visiting e.g. "libkdtree--main--0--patch-57" at the end
> of the URL, I can also specify "libkdtree--main--LATEST--LATEST",
> which is a convenient way to get at the HEAD. The problem is that
> URLs on the page rendered by LATEST
On 14 May 2005 16:52:05 -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
>
> > According to the archzoom upstream site, archzoom supports either tla or
> > baz. Therefore, the Debian package should depend on tla | baz, not just
> > tla.
>
> This is tricky, since the archzoom default is tla. I'd have to
> install a wr
On 20 Feb 2005 00:19:08 -0500, Clint Adams wrote:
>
> > $ ls -ld /var/run
> > drwxr-xr-x9 root root 4096 Feb 20 06:26 /var/run
> >
> > if run_limit_number is set to a positive number archzoom fails
> >
> > I've changed the path in my config to /var/tmp/archzoom-limit though
> > I
On 20 Feb 2005 10:22:29 +1000, apathy wrote:
>
> Package: libarch-perl
> Version: 0.4.2-1
> Severity: normal
> Tags: patch
>
> if you use the base_name arg to Arch::Tarball::create() (like Archzoom does)
> the extra directory doesn't get created.
I think copy_dir should create the destination d
On 26 Jan 2005 08:32:20 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 04:36:27PM +, Mikhael Goikhman wrote:
> > The whole partner categorization thing is currently preliminary and needs
> > some good think. If you send me revision coordinates of the tree you work
On 25 Jan 2005 22:58:47 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
>
> It would appear that archelf isn't properly checking the results from tla
> changes, or whatever it's using to determine which files have been locally
> modified.
>
> To reproduce:
You need "untagged-source unrecognized" to reproduce this
On 25 Jan 2005 11:39:06 -0500, Clint Adams wrote:
>
> > This is fixed now in the developement merge-gui branch.
>
> Should I apply changeset archway--merge-gui--0--patch-33 or wait?
It is up to you. I don't know how critical this is. My window manager
allows to make a window as tall as I want, d
On 25 Jan 2005 22:53:23 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
>
> Filtering based on the version metadata would be wonderful, but I'd settle
> at the moment for being able to exclude sealed versions (a la rbrowse).
I have added a new low priority TODO item: select versions by metadata.
However, I think t
On 25 Jan 2005 22:51:55 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
>
> This may be my understanding of how archmag works (hence the 'minor'
> severity), but it seems like archmag's partner versions list is missing some
> useful branches. In particular, I've got lots of feature branches all
> tagged off a trunk
On 25 Jan 2005 22:45:13 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
>
> It would be nice if sealed branches were automatically categorised
> differently to ordinary branches; I'm thinking that marking them 'hidden'
> might be a bit too much, but a new 'sealed' type would be quite handy.
If you noticed, archmag
On 25 Jan 2005 22:35:28 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
>
> I've got a lot of branches showing up in the "partner versions" window in
> archmag, but I can't get to the rest of them because there's no scrollbar to
> roll down to them. There's a similar window in archmag which does have
> scrollbars,
On 25 Jan 2005 22:42:20 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
>
> Quite a pest, that. Mark all my old branches as hidden and obsolete, quit,
> and when I come back all my useful metadata is gone. Whoops.
Thanks for your feedback, it is useful. I think you may use the bug
tracker on Savannah, since your
15 matches
Mail list logo
