Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-22 Thread Wolfgang
Wolfgang writes: > > Dmitry Chestnykh writes: > > > > > On Jan 22, 2011, at 2:59 PM, Wolfgang wrote: > > >> > > > I tried Dmitry Chestnykh's solution but i got some trouble, when the > > > called > > > process does subsequent 'system(...)'-calls - new DOS-boxes are flickering > > > around.

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-22 Thread Wolfgang
Dmitry Chestnykh writes: > > On Jan 22, 2011, at 2:59 PM, Wolfgang wrote: > >> > > I tried Dmitry Chestnykh's solution but i got some trouble, when the called > > process does subsequent 'system(...)'-calls - new DOS-boxes are flickering > > around. > > That was because I couldn't make it pres

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-22 Thread Dmitry Chestnykh
On Jan 22, 2011, at 2:59 PM, Wolfgang wrote: >> > I tried Dmitry Chestnykh's solution but i got some trouble, when the called > process does subsequent 'system(...)'-calls - new DOS-boxes are flickering > around. That was because I couldn't make it preserve input/output handles from the parent p

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-22 Thread Wolfgang
Richard Hipp writes: > > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 8:24 AM, Francisc Simon wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > The only way, in Windows, that you can have a process started by a user > continue running after logoff (i.e. what "nohup" does) is to start it > either

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-21 Thread Francisc Simon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 21.01.2011 21:36, Nolan Darilek wrote: > On 01/21/2011 07:44 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: >> will be appreciated. Though, I suppose I could make these things a >> posix-only feature. > > > That would be my vote, if in fact you are interested in

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-21 Thread Dmitry Chestnykh
On Jan 21, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > But I did not accept that branch onto the trunk. I want to do the "hooks" > via a different mechanism. But in order to implement this different > mechanism, I need example C code for launching a background process in > windows that is not ass

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-21 Thread Nolan Darilek
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/21/2011 07:44 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > will be appreciated. Though, I suppose I could make these things a > posix-only feature. > That would be my vote, if in fact you are interested in taking votes. :) No sense in *everyone* missing out

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-21 Thread Richard Hipp
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Ron Wilson wrote: > Why not use threads? Perhaps you said this because you are aware of my opinion of threads and you just wanted to push my buttons? Ha! I'm on to your ruse and it won't work! > Multi-threaded processes are supported on both > Windows and

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-21 Thread Ron Wilson
Why not use threads? Multi-threaded processes are supported on both Windows and POSIX. Also, it is poosible to catch the Control-C signal in your process so you can wait until in-progress operations are complete before terminating the process. Your Control-C handler should output a message (to STD

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-21 Thread Lluís Batlle i Rossell
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 07:45:39AM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: > But I did not accept that branch onto the trunk. I want to do the "hooks" > via a different mechanism. But in order to implement this different > mechanism, I need example C code for launching a background process in > windows that i

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-21 Thread Richard Hipp
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 8:24 AM, Francisc Simon wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > The only way, in Windows, that you can have a process started by a user > continue running after logoff (i.e. what "nohup" does) is to start it > either through a "scheduled task" or as a

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-21 Thread Francisc Simon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 21.01.2011 13:45, Richard Hipp wrote: > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Francisc Simon > wrote: > > > Hi @all, > > i probably ask a question that was already asked before but i can not > figure out from the tickets/mailing-list cache if this

Re: [fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-21 Thread Richard Hipp
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Francisc Simon wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > > Hi @all, > > i probably ask a question that was already asked before but i can not > figure out from the tickets/mailing-list cache if this was already > solved or not. > > Is there a

[fossil-users] is there a push/sync/commit hook for unit testing ?

2011-01-20 Thread Francisc Simon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi @all, i probably ask a question that was already asked before but i can not figure out from the tickets/mailing-list cache if this was already solved or not. Is there a way to hook into push/sync/commit commands ? reason: i need a hook that i