January 2010 - Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

.hgignore needs updating?

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Johannes wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 06:09:55AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > furaisanjin wrote: > > > 2010/1/28 corvid <corvid(a)lavabit.com>: > > > > Johannes wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 07:56:37PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > >> > furaisanjin wrote: > > > >> > > This is a minor issue but after building dillo, hg status shows this. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > ? test/cookies > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I guess .hgignore needs updating. > > > >> > > > > >> > *looks* > > > >> > Why doesn't dpidc need to be in .hgignore? > > > >> > > > >> It is matched by dpid/dpid. Not sure if that is a bug or feature of > > > >> mercurial. > > > > > > > > I vote bug. Should we put ^ and $ around everything, or something like that? > > > > > > dpidc is part of dillo repository. Was that perl script? > > > > Yeah, I think it used to be a perl script. > > I don't see dpidc in the repository anymore. > > > > Hmmm. I just looked back at the 2.1 release code. It had > > dpid/dpid in .hgignore, but it had > > dpid.[ch], dpid_common.[ch], dpidc in the repository. > > > > .hgignore is only relevant for untracked (not in the repository) > files. Ignored files will not show up in "hg status" output with "?". > You can always add ignored files to the repo explicitely with "hg add". Ah. I wonder why mercurial wants to take any notice of untracked files, anyway.

Jan. 28, 2010

.hgignore needs updating?

by furaisanjin＠gmail.com

Hmm, this is a puzzle but hg status -i shows all ignored files and dpidc can be seen on the list. Regards, furaisanjin

Jan. 28, 2010

.hgignore needs updating?

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 06:09:55AM +0000, corvid wrote: > furaisanjin wrote: > > 2010/1/28 corvid <corvid(a)lavabit.com>: > > > Johannes wrote: > > >> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 07:56:37PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > >> > furaisanjin wrote: > > >> > > This is a minor issue but after building dillo, hg status shows this. > > >> > > > > >> > > ? test/cookies > > >> > > > > >> > > I guess .hgignore needs updating. > > >> > > > >> > *looks* > > >> > Why doesn't dpidc need to be in .hgignore? > > >> > > >> It is matched by dpid/dpid. Not sure if that is a bug or feature of > > >> mercurial. > > > > > > I vote bug. Should we put ^ and $ around everything, or something like that? > > > > dpidc is part of dillo repository. Was that perl script? > > Yeah, I think it used to be a perl script. > I don't see dpidc in the repository anymore. > > Hmmm. I just looked back at the 2.1 release code. It had > dpid/dpid in .hgignore, but it had > dpid.[ch], dpid_common.[ch], dpidc in the repository. > .hgignore is only relevant for untracked (not in the repository) files. Ignored files will not show up in "hg status" output with "?". You can always add ignored files to the repo explicitely with "hg add".

Jan. 28, 2010

.hgignore needs updating?

by corvid＠lavabit.com

furaisanjin wrote: > 2010/1/28 corvid <corvid(a)lavabit.com>: > > Johannes wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 07:56:37PM +0000, corvid wrote: > >> > furaisanjin wrote: > >> > > This is a minor issue but after building dillo, hg status shows this. > >> > > > >> > > ? test/cookies > >> > > > >> > > I guess .hgignore needs updating. > >> > > >> > *looks* > >> > Why doesn't dpidc need to be in .hgignore? > >> > >> It is matched by dpid/dpid. Not sure if that is a bug or feature of > >> mercurial. > > > > I vote bug. Should we put ^ and $ around everything, or something like that? > > dpidc is part of dillo repository. Was that perl script? Yeah, I think it used to be a perl script. I don't see dpidc in the repository anymore. Hmmm. I just looked back at the 2.1 release code. It had dpid/dpid in .hgignore, but it had dpid.[ch], dpid_common.[ch], dpidc in the repository.

Jan. 28, 2010

.hgignore needs updating?

by furaisanjin＠gmail.com

2010/1/28 corvid <corvid(a)lavabit.com>: > Johannes wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 07:56:37PM +0000, corvid wrote: >> > furaisanjin wrote: >> > > This is a minor issue but after building dillo, hg status shows this. >> > > >> > > ? test/cookies >> > > >> > > I guess .hgignore needs updating. >> > >> > *looks* >> > Why doesn't dpidc need to be in .hgignore? >> >> It is matched by dpid/dpid. Not sure if that is a bug or feature of >> mercurial. > > I vote bug. Should we put ^ and $ around everything, or something like that? dpidc is part of dillo repository. Was that perl script? Regards, furaisanjin

Jan. 27, 2010

.hgignore needs updating?

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Johannes wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 07:56:37PM +0000, corvid wrote: > > furaisanjin wrote: > > > This is a minor issue but after building dillo, hg status shows this. > > > > > > ? test/cookies > > > > > > I guess .hgignore needs updating. > > > > *looks* > > Why doesn't dpidc need to be in .hgignore? > > It is matched by dpid/dpid. Not sure if that is a bug or feature of > mercurial. I vote bug. Should we put ^ and $ around everything, or something like that?

Jan. 27, 2010

.hgignore needs updating?

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 07:56:37PM +0000, corvid wrote: > furaisanjin wrote: > > This is a minor issue but after building dillo, hg status shows this. > > > > ? test/cookies > > > > I guess .hgignore needs updating. > > *looks* > Why doesn't dpidc need to be in .hgignore? It is matched by dpid/dpid. Not sure if that is a bug or feature of mercurial.

Jan. 27, 2010

.hgignore needs updating?

by corvid＠lavabit.com

furaisanjin wrote: > This is a minor issue but after building dillo, hg status shows this. > > ? test/cookies > > I guess .hgignore needs updating. *looks* Why doesn't dpidc need to be in .hgignore?

Jan. 27, 2010

.hgignore needs updating?

by furaisanjin＠gmail.com

Hi all. This is a minor issue but after building dillo, hg status shows this. ? test/cookies I guess .hgignore needs updating. Regards, furaisanjin

Jan. 27, 2010

dpidc

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 04:39:42PM +0200, Rogut??s Sparnuotos wrote: > Johannes Hofmann (2010-01-26 13:55): > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 09:34:17AM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 03:42:44AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > Jorge wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 03:55:39AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > > > - Why does install-dpi-local put dpidc in ~/.dillo, anyway? > > > > > > Wouldn't that be unusual for it to be in anyone's path? > > > > > > > > > > The idea was to have most dillo-related things in that > > > > > directory. Subdirectories in ~/bin look rare, so lacking a better > > > > > idea it ended in ~/.dillo > > > > > > > > To me, it makes the most sense to put it wherever dillo goes. > > > > > > Yes, I agree. > > > Sorry, I was thinking of the dpis. > > > > > > The user may not have permission to install system-wide, and in > > > that case probably dillo, dpid, and dpidc should be in ~/bin and > > > the dpis in ~/.dillo/dpi. > > > > Do we really need to add special handling for this? > > Normally I would expect binaries in $PREFIX/bin and dpis also in > > $PREFIX/bin or $PREFIX/libexec. > > The user has to use a PREFIX where he has write access of course. > > But then the rest is taken care of by autoconf and friends, no? > > At most, the instructions to build dillo [1] could include suggestions how > to run dillo locally. No more special handling should be needed (autoconf > takes care of this case, yes). > > The instructions could be as scarce as this (hope they are correct): > If you choose to install under a different prefix > (./configure --prefix=dir), note that dillo needs > the binaries dpid, dpidc to be in your $PATH. +1 -- Cheers Jorge.-

Jan. 26, 2010