Re: [fossil-users] Using fossil with Bitbake and the Yocto project

2014-07-02 Thread Ross Berteig
On 6/30/2014 6:53 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: After some effort, I believe I have a working BitBake recipe for cross-compiling fossil in an embedded Linux distribution built by the Yocto Project's BitBake tool. I'll post my recipe for building fossil itself separately, after I've verified that t

Re: [fossil-users] Using fossil with Bitbake and the Yocto project

2014-07-02 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Ron Wilson wrote: > As for Fossil providing the needed bits to write a plug-in to any given > tool, it is possible to write a plug-in that uses the command line Fossil. > Or, for that matter, a hybrid that uses libfossil for information and > fossil to perform comm

Re: [fossil-users] Using fossil with Bitbake and the Yocto project

2014-07-01 Thread Ron Wilson
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: > > And I suspect that someday libfossil will provide the needed bits for that > plugin. Just not today. :-) My point was not whether Fossil (as Fossil or as libfossil) provided the needed bits, but that writing a plug-in is harder than config

Re: [fossil-users] Using fossil with Bitbake and the Yocto project

2014-07-01 Thread Stephan Beal
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: > >> If BitBake provides for configuring "generic" command line VCS clients, >> this should be easy. However, I have noticed an increasing number of >> open source projects "deprecating" general support for command line >> clients in favor of "

Re: [fossil-users] Using fossil with Bitbake and the Yocto project

2014-07-01 Thread Ross Berteig
On 7/1/2014 12:30 PM, Ron Wilson wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Ross Berteig mailto:r...@cheshireeng.com>> wrote: BitBake wants *both* MD5 and SHA256 of the tarball that it plans to download. I would guess this derives from the (increasingly less) common practice of proje

Re: [fossil-users] Using fossil with Bitbake and the Yocto project

2014-07-01 Thread Ron Wilson
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: > > BitBake wants *both* MD5 and SHA256 of the tarball that it plans to > download. Since the tarball contains a folder name supplied by URL > parameters, fossil would have to construct the tarball with parameters and > compute both checksums. I

Re: [fossil-users] Using fossil with Bitbake and the Yocto project

2014-07-01 Thread Stephan Beal
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Ross Berteig wrote: > On the subject of thankless documentation tasks, the original help text > for both the /tarball and /zip pages uses the term RID. From a search > through the /test-all-help page, that term is used only rarely. (I spot it > on /ci, /ci_edit, /

Re: [fossil-users] Using fossil with Bitbake and the Yocto project

2014-07-01 Thread Ross Berteig
On 7/1/2014 8:39 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Ross Berteig mailto:r...@cheshireeng.com>> wrote: Thank you very much for this. i will get the docs updated (@Shal: yours, too) within the next couple days. You're welcome. I figured that having put the effort into u

Re: [fossil-users] Using fossil with Bitbake and the Yocto project

2014-07-01 Thread Stephan Beal
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Ross Berteig wrote: > > However, the documentation at http://www.fossil-scm.org/ > fossil/help?cmd=/tarball is somewhat confusing. It reads in full: > > URL: /tarball/RID.tar.gz >> >> Generate a compressed tarball for a checkin. >> Return that tarball as the H

[fossil-users] Using fossil with Bitbake and the Yocto project

2014-06-30 Thread Ross Berteig
After some effort, I believe I have a working BitBake recipe for cross-compiling fossil in an embedded Linux distribution built by the Yocto Project's BitBake tool. While getting this to work, I've also noticed that the documentation for the /zip and /tarball pages could be better. All in all