-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This is very annoying :-(
After a 'mt db migrate' monotone sees more private keys than there are ..
Regards,
Malte
#
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/wissenschaft/uk.ac.bas.bibliography mt
Is there a reason why this has to be integrated in Monotone rather than using
tunneling?
Joel
*SNIP*
___
Monotone-devel mailing list
Monotone-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Nathaniel Smith wrote:
On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 10:07:36AM -0500, Chad Walstrom wrote:
In any case, I'm committed to using Monotone now. I'm looking forward
to the usher code and cvssync code making its way into the main tree.
;-) Great work guys!
Usher code is not only in the main
Zbynek Winkler wrote:
Could someone enlighten me about the new usher code? What is it? I
also remember reading about some roasters...?
rosters... though I've also no clue what they are.
--
Jon Bright
Silicon Circus Ltd.
http://www.siliconcircus.com
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:57:02 +0100, Joel Crisp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
jcrisp Is there a reason why this has to be integrated in Monotone
jcrisp rather than using tunneling?
Not really, but we're still waiting for the .ssh branch to be finished
to make that a viable
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 11 Oct 2005 13:03:45 +0200, Zbynek Winkler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
zwin Could someone enlighten me about the new usher code? What is
zwin it? I also remember reading about some roasters...?
usher is basically an
Jon Bright wrote:
Zbynek
Winkler wrote:
I also remember reading about some
"roasters"...?
"rosters"... though I've also no clue what they are.
I've been hanging out in the #monotone IRC channel, and believe I have
a basic theoretical understanding of "rosters", which I will now
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:27:30 +0200, Zbynek
Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
zwin Oh! That is a big step towards using monotone on a multiuser
zwin machine.
Hmm, I hadn't thought of it that way. For me, it's more of a security
concern, where I want different
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 11:57:02AM +0100, Joel Crisp wrote:
Is there a reason why this has to be integrated in Monotone rather than
using tunneling?
Eh, there are some advantages to integrating it -- ssh tunneling
requires people have logins on the remote box, requires they have ssh
installed,
I don't have any particular plans to implement it myself, and
writing my own crypto protocol makes me Very Very Nervous. And SSL
and SSH libraries seem to be uniformly horrid.
I haven't looked at any SSH ones, but OpenSSL doesn't seem too
horrible---I'd guess it's not much more horrible
Hi Nathaniel
Another alternative might be to have a utility to convert x509 certs and
their associated private keys to the format monotone uses, and then use
the former for SSL tunneling. If monotone is using RSA keys, it could be
(almost) trivial.
The advantage is that x509 is supported by a
Chad Walstrom wrote:
Zbynek Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've converted to Mercurial and I had 2 main reasons:
1) not being able to compile monotone with gcc -- Mercurial is in Python
I believe there are pre-compiled, static binaries floating about, and
RPM and DEB packages
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 10:43:22PM +0200, Zbynek Winkler wrote:
I see that the 0.22 package uploaded to debian unstable depends on
boost1.33 that does seem to be getting into testing :(. So I've
downloaded the 0.23 packages from the monotone website. That depends on
1.32. Is this what is
Hi all,
Below is a patch, per the venge.net/monotone/quickies.html list, to
change the monotone serve syntax from
monotone serve ADDRESS[:PORT] PATTERN ...
to
monotone [--bind=[ADDRESS:]PORT] serve PATTERN ...
where, if you leave out ADDRESS it listens on all interfaces, which is
also the
At 2005-10-11T19:12:58+0200, Thomas Moschny wrote:
The method explain_usage() in commands.cc prints translated strings for
the command groups, but it uses the untranslated message-ids for computing
the layout, so the result may look ugly in a non-en_US locale. For
example:
The attached
When I server all branches with
monotone serve 0.0.0.0 *
I can not sync from other computers, I get an error
something like:
access denied due to branch xxx.yyy
Using monotone version 0.23.
Is this known?
If not I will write a more detailed report.
Wim Oudshoorn.
Color me impatient. I got one thumbs up on IRC, and the quickies file
is supposed to be all uncontroversial items, so I committed. Just
consider the email fair warning of the change in usage (it can bite you
because the old command form is still valid, but it uses what you intend
to be the
Is your shell expanding *? I would think the command should be
monotone serve 0.0.0.0 '*'
-emile
On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 01:17 +0200, Wim Oudshoorn wrote:
When I server all branches with
monotone serve 0.0.0.0 *
I can not sync from other computers, I get an error
something like:
On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 01:17 +0200, Wim Oudshoorn wrote:
When I server all branches with
monotone serve 0.0.0.0 *
I can not sync from other computers, I get an error
something like:
access denied due to branch xxx.yyy
Using monotone version 0.23.
Is this known?
Your shell is
At 2005-10-12T01:17:27+0200, Wim Oudshoorn wrote:
When I server all branches with
monotone serve 0.0.0.0 *
I can not sync from other computers, I get an error
something like:
access denied due to branch xxx.yyy
Using monotone version 0.23.
Is this known?
You need to escape the
Matthew Gregan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 2005-10-12T01:17:27+0200, Wim Oudshoorn wrote:
When I server all branches with
monotone serve 0.0.0.0 *
I can not sync from other computers, I get an error
something like:
access denied due to branch xxx.yyy
Using monotone version 0.23.
Nathaniel Smith wrote:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 02:32:32AM +0200, Bruno Hertz wrote:
As a sidenote, this will happen more often as monotone becomes more
widespread, since ppl tend to be confused by tools which implement
their own globbing syntax (cf. 'find'). Especially so when it's
22 matches
Mail list logo
