On 1/21/16, Baruch Burstein wrote:
>
> If fossil is compiled without fuse
> support, ... It also
> shouldn't show up in the listing of "fossil help".
That could be fixed (probably) by omitting "fusefs" from the "fossil
help" listing on systems where fusefs is not supported, just as
commands like
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
> So I left that proposal on its branch.
Since this was mentioned, I have a question about fossil development
etiquette. In the last couple of days, I have had some time and have made a
few fixes and (in my opinion) improvements. Each one is
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
> On 1/21/16, Stephan Beal wrote:
> > Hiho,
> >
> > since this is pending review...
> >
> > http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/06fd798bdcb9da50
> >
> > FYI: that won't compile properly on some systems because C does not allow
> > an emp
On 1/21/16, Stephan Beal wrote:
> Hiho,
>
> since this is pending review...
>
> http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/06fd798bdcb9da50
>
> FYI: that won't compile properly on some systems because C does not allow
> an empty compilation unit, which is what that amounts to when fuse is
> disable
Hiho,
since this is pending review...
http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/06fd798bdcb9da50
FYI: that won't compile properly on some systems because C does not allow
an empty compilation unit, which is what that amounts to when fuse is
disabled. (i had a similar proble
Personally i prefer t
