Could i convince one of the devs more familiar with the symlinks bits
refine Joerg's explanation below into one of the embedded docs? It's a
pretty good explanation/summary, IMO.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:33 PM, j. van den hoff
wrote:
> On Fri, 09 May 2014 19:45:01 +0200, Matt Welland
> wrote:
>
>"j. van den hoff"
> writes:
> 1. allow-symlinks off (default):
>
> a)
> if the symlinks are ADDed and checkedin,
> content is tracked across the links, i.e. as far as fossil is concerned
> everything acts as if the actual files where local to the repo:
> changes are noted, checkouts overwrite th
On Fri, 09 May 2014 21:07:59 +0200, Stephan Beal
wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:02 PM, j. van den hoff
wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2014 20:42:06 +0200, Stephan Beal
wrote:
IMO. (That said, i never was a big fan of having symlink support in
fossil!)
well, the possibility to do that symlin
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:02 PM, j. van den hoff
wrote:
> On Fri, 09 May 2014 20:42:06 +0200, Stephan Beal
> wrote:
>
>>
>> IMO. (That said, i never was a big fan of having symlink support in
>> fossil!)
>>
>
> well, the possibility to do that symlink trick for tracking config files
> all over th
On Fri, 09 May 2014 20:42:06 +0200, Stephan Beal
wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:33 PM, j. van den hoff
wrote:
b)
if this repo is cloned and opened, indeed the original files materialize
in the checkout, i.e. the symlink information is lost (probably never
was there in the repo?). I presume
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:33 PM, j. van den hoff
wrote:
> b)
> if this repo is cloned and opened, indeed the original files materialize
> in the checkout, i.e. the symlink information is lost (probably never
> was there in the repo?). I presume(...) this also does not contradict
> the documentation
On Fri, 09 May 2014 19:45:01 +0200, Matt Welland
wrote:
FYI, beware that there may be a bug with symlinks support in the more
recent versions of fossil. I haven't reported it as I haven't had time to
reproduce it but a couple of users have complained that when they
clone/open a fossil that ha
FYI, beware that there may be a bug with symlinks support in the more
recent versions of fossil. I haven't reported it as I haven't had time to
reproduce it but a couple of users have complained that when they
clone/open a fossil that has allow-symlinks = true that the symlinks are
replaced by the
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 6:30 PM, j. van den hoff
wrote:
> modified. so my understanding is when 'on' the softlinks are just
> maintained
> in the repo while when 'off' (the default) the system should behave like
> what you describe:
> track the changes across the softlinks (i.e. the "real content"
On Fri, 09 May 2014 17:30:02 +0200, Joseph Mingrone wrote:
I was asked off the list to share what I ended up using. It was really
quite simple in the end. I somehow missed the setting "allow-symlinks".
With this turned on, I just create symbolic links in the local tree and
now, on the rare oc
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Joseph Mingrone wrote:
> can easily deal with those issues. So, ~/scm/host_config.fossil/
> contains the repository (host_config.fossil) and symbolic links to files
> all over the system (/etc/ and /usr/local/etc/ mostly). So far this has
> worked well for my nee
I was asked off the list to share what I ended up using. It was really
quite simple in the end. I somehow missed the setting "allow-symlinks".
With this turned on, I just create symbolic links in the local tree and
now, on the rare occasions that I pull, the link ins't wiped out, but
the file poi
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Joseph Mingrone wrote:
> Thank you all for taking the time to share your thoughts. Since I
> won't be moving these files around too often, I think I will give Fossil
> (along with Tripwire) a go at this. Does Fossil have something
> equivalent to
>
>
On 4/28/2014 3:15 PM, Joseph Mingrone wrote:
Thank you all for taking the time to share your thoughts. Since I
won't be moving these files around too often, I think I will give Fossil
(along with Tripwire) a go at this. Does Fossil have something
equivalent to
config core.worktree
Thank you all for taking the time to share your thoughts. Since I
won't be moving these files around too often, I think I will give Fossil
(along with Tripwire) a go at this. Does Fossil have something
equivalent to
config core.worktree "../../"
which allows you to separate the rep
They told me they use the open source version of Tripwire (
http://sourceforge.net/projects/tripwire/).
They won't let me even see the scripts, but said they started with scripts
they found on the web. I tried looking, but only found general stuff.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Chad Perrin w
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 12:23:29AM -0400, Ron Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Will Parsons wrote:
>
> > This kind of stuff isn't a "project", and you don't
> > need the extra stuff that Fossil (or Git, Mercurial, Bazaar,
> > Subversion, or CVS) provide. I've tracked system files
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Will Parsons wrote:
> This kind of stuff isn't a "project", and you don't
> need the extra stuff that Fossil (or Git, Mercurial, Bazaar,
> Subversion, or CVS) provide. I've tracked system files for over a
> decade with RCS (and before that with SCCS) and see no re
Joseph Mingrone wrote:
> Is Fossil an appropriate tool for tracking system configuration files?
> If you are doing this, would you mind sharing your best practices?
No. Use RCS instead. Seriously. I've seen this question come up
before on other lists devoted to SCM's - how to do this in Mercuri
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Joseph Mingrone wrote:
> Is Fossil an appropriate tool for tracking system configuration files?
>
For for user-specific ones, IMO, and then not for everything, e.g. SSH
likes certain files to have certain permissions, and fossil does not do
permissions except for
20 matches
Mail list logo
