Re: [fossil-users] symlinks (was Re: xkcd on git)

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Eric Rubin-Smith wrote: > the user when trying to move a tarball from one OS to another. In other > words, I believe that you perceive a dichotomy that is false (between (a) > not implementing symlinks at all and (b) implementing them while having > fossil perfect

Re: [fossil-users] impersonating users

Thus said jungle Boogie on Mon, 02 Nov 2015 22:17:50 -0800: > http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/653b6b92404c53f3 > Do I not see the received from because I am not logged into the repo? Correct. Also, I might add, that even if you do have a login, only having the right privileges will

Re: [fossil-users] impersonating users

On 2 November 2015 at 22:02, Andy Bradford wrote: > 1) Browse to your server (e.g. http://localhost:8080/ in your example), > login and click on a checkin. You will see something like: > > Received From: tester @ 127.0.0.1 on 2015-11-03 05:56:22 Follow up question that I hope you don't mind

Re: [fossil-users] impersonating users

Thus said Eduard on Tue, 03 Nov 2015 00:20:08 -0500: > I understand why this is (I'm not complaining); I just want to know > whether there's some command/page for listing recently received > control artifacts whose user does not match the user pushing them, so > they can be further insp

[fossil-users] impersonating users

Hi, It seems that anyone with checkin privileges can push anything to a fossil server, including artifacts that claim to come from other users. I understand why this is (I'm not complaining); I just want to know whether there's some command/page for listing recently received control artifacts whos

Re: [fossil-users] Can't build Fossil 1.34 with Tcl 8.5

Piotr Orzechowski wrote: > > Adding --with-tcl-stubs and --with-tcl-private-stubs did not help. > Did you try "make distclean" first? > > That #define looks scary, to be honest. ;) > I wrote both the Tcl and Fossil code in question and I can personally assure you that it is safe (also I just

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Jan Danielsson wrote: > On 03/11/15 00:38, Scott Robison wrote: > >>> On 11/2/15, Jan Danielsson wrote: > > Supporting symlinks on Windows would currently be a little mess. > >>> > >>> What if we just say that symlinks don't work on Windows and that if

Re: [fossil-users] fossil v1.34 unexpected CLEAN command changes from v1.33

On 11/2/15, to...@acm.org wrote: > I built the latest version and (unfortunately, for me) CLEAN no longer asks > for confirmation. > > Is this something I can have behave the way it was in v1.33 via some > setting? (I often do a clean but may want to skip some file, so I like to > be asked.) I j

Re: [fossil-users] symlinks (was Re: xkcd on git)

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:00 PM, bch wrote: > > After I posted this, I thought a Makefile (still to manage actual > symlinks) would be an improvement over a shell script; you're punting > on symlinks completely (using VPATH). How has VPATH (or the previous > shell script) treated you as a symlink m

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 03/11/15 00:38, Scott Robison wrote: >>> On 11/2/15, Jan Danielsson wrote: Supporting symlinks on Windows would currently be a little mess. >>> >>> What if we just say that symlinks don't work on Windows and that if >>> you include them in your repo, you won't be able to checkout (s

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Ron W wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Scott Robison > wrote: >> >> From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_symbolic_link#Restrictions: The >> default security settings in Windows Vista/Windows 7 >> disallow non-el

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Scott Robison wrote: > > From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_symbolic_link#Restrictions: The > default security settings in Windows Vista/Windows 7 > disallow non-elevated > administrators and all non-administrators from

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Nov 2, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Jan Danielsson wrote: > > I don't know which is worse; not supporting symlinks at all on > Windows, or telling people that they need to have administrator > privileges on their system in order to check the code out I agree, which is why the policy decision needs to

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Warren Young wrote: > On Nov 2, 2015, at 3:56 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > > On 11/2/15, Jan Danielsson wrote: > >> > >> Supporting symlinks on Windows would currently be a little mess. > > > > What if we just say that symlinks don't work on Windows and that i

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 03/11/15 00:00, Warren Young wrote: > On Nov 2, 2015, at 3:56 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: >> >> On 11/2/15, Jan Danielsson wrote: >>> >>> Supporting symlinks on Windows would currently be a little mess. >> >> What if we just say that symlinks don't work on Windows and that if >> you include them

[fossil-users] fossil v1.34 unexpected CLEAN command changes from v1.33

I built the latest version and (unfortunately, for me) CLEAN no longer asks for confirmation. Is this something I can have behave the way it was in v1.33 via some setting? (I often do a clean but may want to skip some file, so I like to be asked.) If not possible anymore, is there at least som

Re: [fossil-users] Can't build Fossil 1.34 with Tcl 8.5

Thanks, guys. Adding --with-tcl-stubs and --with-tcl-private-stubs did not help. I still get the: bld/th_tcl.o: In function `evaluateTclWithEvents': /fossil-src-1.34/./src/th_tcl.c:1069: undefined reference to `Tcl_Canceled' collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status make: *** [fossil] Błąd 1 Th

Re: [fossil-users] symlinks (was Re: xkcd on git)

On 11/2/15, Ron W wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 1:16 PM, bch wrote: >> >> Philosophically, I think of links as build artifacts, which are rarely >> stored in an scm. I do avoid them as much as possible, but I've >> occasionally wondered: does anybody manage the links as the build >> artifacts >

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Nov 2, 2015, at 3:56 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > > On 11/2/15, Jan Danielsson wrote: >> >> Supporting symlinks on Windows would currently be a little mess. > > What if we just say that symlinks don't work on Windows and that if > you include them in your repo, you won't be able to checkout

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 11/2/15, Jan Danielsson wrote: > >Supporting symlinks on Windows would currently be a little mess. What if we just say that symlinks don't work on Windows and that if you include them in your repo, you won't be able to checkout (sanely) on Windows? -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org

Re: [fossil-users] Can't build Fossil 1.34 with Tcl 8.5

Piotr Orzechowski wrote: > > /fossil-src-1.34/./src/th_tcl.c:1069: undefined > reference to `Tcl_Canceled' > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > make: *** [fossil] Error 1 > Thanks for the report. There are a couple workarounds: 1. use "--with-tcl-private-stubs=1" with configu

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 02/11/15 23:23, Warren Young wrote: >> Windows will ultimately get decent symlink support. > > I doubt it. Microsoft has tried to take a bite of that apple twice, and > screwed it up both times. > > First there was the Windows 95 *.lnk file feature, which is basically only a > symlink to Wi

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 11/2/15, Warren Young wrote: > On Oct 30, 2015, at 11:27 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote: >> >> Unless you delete .git your checkout is always in well defined state. > > Three words: Detached Head State. > Forgot about that one. I amend my earlier disparaging remarks about Git to include now a sec

Re: [fossil-users] Can't build Fossil 1.34 with Tcl 8.5

2015-11-02 23:43 GMT+01:00 Piotr Orzechowski : > Hi, > > I can't build Fossil 1.34 with Tcl 8.5 (8.5.0-2.1) on fully up-to-date > Debian Wheezy 64-bit. > > I configure Fossil with: > > ./configure --prefix=/opt --with-openssl --with-tcl=/usr/lib/tcl8.5 > --with-th1-hooks --json --with-zlib Just ad

[fossil-users] Can't build Fossil 1.34 with Tcl 8.5

Hi, I can't build Fossil 1.34 with Tcl 8.5 (8.5.0-2.1) on fully up-to-date Debian Wheezy 64-bit. I configure Fossil with: ./configure --prefix=/opt --with-openssl --with-tcl=/usr/lib/tcl8.5 --with-th1-hooks --json --with-zlib And I then get the following from make: /fossil-src-1.34/./src/th_tc

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Oct 30, 2015, at 11:27 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > > Unless you delete .git your checkout is always in well defined state. Three words: Detached Head State. https://www.google.com/?q=detached%20head%20state ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-u

Re: [fossil-users] symlinks (was Re: xkcd on git)

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 1:16 PM, bch wrote: > > Philosophically, I think of links as build artifacts, which are rarely > stored in an scm. I do avoid them as much as possible, but I've > occasionally wondered: does anybody manage the links as the build artifacts > of a script, and keep the script i

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Nov 1, 2015, at 6:09 PM, Ron W wrote: > > On MS Windows, that is how it has to be done. Symlinks require the user be an > admin Yes, but also, you must be running cmd.exe *as* Admin if you have UAC enabled, since the normal cmd.exe window can’t auto-elevate itself. > and use a special comm

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Oct 31, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Matt Welland wrote: > > Windows will ultimately get decent symlink support. I doubt it. Microsoft has tried to take a bite of that apple twice, and screwed it up both times. First there was the Windows 95 *.lnk file feature, which is basically only a symlink to W

[fossil-users] Referencing files through a convenience symlink

I have a Fossil repo with a few convenience symlinks in it. They exist just to reduce the apparent directory depth in a few places. I’ve enabled allow-symlinks, since without that, Fossil misbehaves. But with the setting enabled, Fossil refuses to dereference a symlink, which causes usabili

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 02/11/15 19:40, Richard Hipp wrote: On 11/2/15, Michal Suchanek wrote: when you want to separate the changes you want to commit and changes you want to ... keep uncommitted to do more work on them this is quite useful. And don't tell me nobody ever mixes unrelated and possibly conflicting ch

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > Rewriting history in git is your choice. You can use git without > rewriting. And really, a merge becoming "impossible" does not really > depend on rewriting. If you have conflicting changes you just have > conflicting changes. > You shou

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 11/2/15, Michal Suchanek wrote: > > when you > want to separate the changes you want to commit and changes you want > to ... keep uncommitted to do more work on them this is quite > useful. And don't tell me nobody ever mixes unrelated and possibly > conflicting changes in the same working dire

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 2 November 2015 at 20:20, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 11/2/15, Michal Suchanek wrote: >> In fossil you can have multiple checkouts but there is afaik no >> in-fossil tool to jump between them > > The "cd" command (not even a part of fossil) exists in both unix and > windows shells and is sufficie

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 11/2/15, Michal Suchanek wrote: > In fossil you can have multiple checkouts but there is afaik no > in-fossil tool to jump between them The "cd" command (not even a part of fossil) exists in both unix and windows shells and is sufficient to carry you from one check-out to another. Why do you

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 2 November 2015 at 18:20, Scott Robison wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Michal Suchanek wrote: >> >> On 31 October 2015 at 23:33, Richard Hipp wrote: >> > >> > I'll argue that Git is not beneficial even to people who have mastered >> > its arcane syntax. Here's why: >> > >> > In com

Re: [fossil-users] Patch: Document --quiet option in rebuild

On 11/2/15, Christopher M. Fuhrman wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Howdy, > > Discovered that the rebuild command supported an undocumented option, > - --quiet. Since 'fossil help' was, er, quiet about the quiet option, I've > created a patch that mentions it when d

[fossil-users] Patch: Document --quiet option in rebuild

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Howdy, Discovered that the rebuild command supported an undocumented option, - --quiet. Since 'fossil help' was, er, quiet about the quiet option, I've created a patch that mentions it when doing a 'fossil help rebuild'. Example output: Usage: ./

Re: [fossil-users] symlinks

Fossil version 1.34 has been tagged and binaries are now available on the website (except for OpenBSD, which I cannot build at the moment because devio.us is down, but probably anybody who uses OpenBSD can run "./configure; make" against the tarball.) So now would be a good time to hack away at a

Re: [fossil-users] symlinks (was Re: xkcd on git)

On Nov 2, 2015 9:32 AM, "Eric Rubin-Smith" wrote: > > My problem is not the decision itself, but that, in terms of how fossil should behave, it's a philosophical question. Those have no right/wrong answer, and i dislike seeing software pretend to know the answer to such questions. >>> >>> >>>

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Konstantin Khomoutov < flatw...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:53:52 +0100 > Stephan Beal wrote: > > > > Unless you delete .git your checkout is always in well defined > > > state. > > No, it's not. i once literally had one of the libgit mai

[fossil-users] symlinks (was Re: xkcd on git)

> My problem is not the decision itself, but that, in terms of how fossil >>> should behave, it's a philosophical question. Those have no right/wrong >>> answer, and i dislike seeing software pretend to know the answer to such >>> questions. >>> >> >> Isn't that essentially confirming my point? Fos

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > On 31 October 2015 at 23:33, Richard Hipp wrote: > > > > I'll argue that Git is not beneficial even to people who have mastered > > its arcane syntax. Here's why: > > > > In common usage, Git requires the user to remember the following st

Re: [fossil-users] SHA-1 in user.pw field

Thus said Warren Young on Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:02:40 -0600: > Are there Fossil passwords worth that much? I think so, and the cost > is continually falling. Fossil does have the option of using SSH and it can be secured with a variety of mechanisms that are more secure than Fossil's bu

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

Thus said Scott Doctor on Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:37:47 -0700: > What I meant was I end up spending much time trying to get the tools > to do what I want it to do versus how it wants to do it. In your opinion, how can a DVCS tool get the job done in the way you want to do it? Tha

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:53:52 +0100 Stephan Beal wrote: > > Unless you delete .git your checkout is always in well defined > > state. > No, it's not. i once literally had one of the libgit maintainers at > my desk for a full hour trying to get my repo (of a project we were > both working on for ou

Re: [fossil-users] xkcd on git

On 31 October 2015 at 23:33, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 10/31/15, Matt Welland wrote: >> >> Regarding git, other than it's arcane interface (i) the you are paying in >> learning curve for the additional power that comes from the extra degrees >> of freedom it provides. A developer willing to invest

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil server

On 02.11.2015 09:29:29 Jan Danielsson wrote: On 01/11/15 13:30, Damien Sykes-Pendleton wrote: I’m running Windows. I’m not personally running anything on port 80, though I get a blank web page (as opposed to a 404 or problem loading error) when I visit localhost. I forget the name of the