Search Results

Search found 3308 results on 133 pages for 'hg git'.

Page 52/133 | < Previous Page | 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59  | Next Page >

  • list of all commits SHA1_HASH

    - by dorelal
    git init echo 'I am foo' > foo.txt git add foo.txt # this woould create a git commit object echo ' I am foo2' > foo.txt git add foo.txt # this would create another git commit object git commit -m 'doe' # this would create two git # objects: one commit object and one tree object How do I get a list of all 4 commits SHA1_HASH ? cd .git/objects ls (master)$ ls -al total 0 drwxr-xr-x 8 nsingh staff 272 Mar 27 16:44 . drwxr-xr-x 13 nsingh staff 442 Mar 27 16:44 .. drwxr-xr-x 3 nsingh staff 102 Mar 27 16:44 37 drwxr-xr-x 3 nsingh staff 102 Mar 27 16:43 a2 drwxr-xr-x 3 nsingh staff 102 Mar 27 16:44 e1 drwxr-xr-x 3 nsingh staff 102 Mar 27 16:42 e6 drwxr-xr-x 2 nsingh staff 68 Mar 27 16:42 info drwxr-xr-x 2 nsingh staff 68 Mar 27 16:42 pack I can find the list of all 4 commits by looking at file here but there must be a better way.

    Read the article

  • It is said that Mercurial's "hg clone" is very cheap... but it is 400MB on my hard drive? (on Mac OS

    - by Jian Lin
    I have a project I cloned over the network to the Mac hard drive (OS X Snow Leopard). The project is about 1GB in the hard drive du -s 2073848 . so when I hg clone proj proj2 then when I MacBook-Pro ~/development $ du -s proj 2073848 proj MacBook-Pro ~/development $ du -s proj2 894840 proj2 MacBook-Pro ~/development $ du -s 2397928 . so the clone seems not so cheap... probably around 400MB... is that so? also, the whole folder grew by about 200MB, which is not the total of proj and proj2 by the way... are there some links and some are not links, that's why the overlapping is not counted twice?

    Read the article

  • hg clone has stopped working on my Vista box

    - by vkraemer
    I have a Windows Vista machine that has been connecting to http://hg.netbeans.org productively for awhile... until recently. Lately, when I attempt to pull or clone, the update appears to stall... I see the following messages on the screen when I attempt to clone: destination directory: web-main requesting all changes adding changesets And then... nothing happens. I have opened the Task Manager and there doesn't appear to be any significant network activity for HOURS. I can contact the server with FireFox and see the proper output. I can clone from the repo with Solaris and/or Mac OS X... so the issue doesn't appear to be at the 'other end'. I had been running a fairly old version of Mercurial before this started happening. After it started happening, I upgraded to Mercurial 1.5.2.. which did not help resolve the issue at all. What are the likely causes and work-arounds for this?

    Read the article

  • Man broke, possibly on installing git, how do I fix?

    - by Emd
    I am running Mac snow leopard 10.6.3 and I used a mac installer program for git that was designed originally for leopard. I think since then my man pages have been broken and attempting to look up any command makes my computer stall for a bit before returning 'no manpage found.' Where do I begin fixing this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Are these GitHub features implemented in BitBucket?

    - by doug
    I recently joined a company that, while using git for version control, uses BitBucket as remote/master + git interface for projects. This is my first exposure to BitBucket. There are a couple of GitHub features I rely heavily on in my daily workflow and I am trying to find their counterpart in BitBucket or else how I can recreate the same functionality if it is not provided out-of-the-box. In particular, in GitHub I rely heavily on tags (which I realize reside in git) to link commits to issues (feature request, bug report, etc.); in addition, given projects specs are often decomposed into milestones, I use the milestone feature in GitHub Issues to track progress towards our project milestones (ie, in GitHub a milestone is comprised of a sequence of issues, and the commit tagged with the last remaining issue under that Milestone, causes that Milestone to be annotated as completed. I suspect this workflow can be recreated using Jira, which my new employer also uses, but before trying that, I want to learn if it's already implemented and I just can't find it.

    Read the article

  • What is the usual procedure for working with remote Git repositories?

    - by James
    A slightly open question regarding best practices, I can find lots of functional guides for git but not much info about standard ordering of operations etc: Whats the standard/nice way of working with remote repositories, specifically for making a change and taking it all the way back to the remote master. Can someone provide a step-by-step list of procedures they normally follow when doing this. i.e. something like: 1) clone repo 2) create new local branch of head 3) make changes locally and commit to local branch 4) ...

    Read the article

  • Are there any good graphical git and hg/Mercurial clients on Mac OS X?

    - by DASKAjA
    I'm searching for compelling git and Mercurial clients on Mac OS X. The most clients I've found so far were less compelling as I expected. Some of the clients are programmed even in ruby or tcl/tk, which IMO aren't good OSX citizens in regard of integration in the OS. I've clients in mind similar to Versions.app or Cornetstone which are subversion-only clients. Perhaps somebody got an insider tip for me.

    Read the article

  • Installing Xen 4.0.1 from Source on Ubuntu 10.10

    - by markus
    I'm trying to install Xen 4.0.1 from Source on Ubuntu 10.10 Server Edition. I started with a clean machine and followed the instructions from https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Xen. So I installed the packages mentioned there with: sudo apt-get install gettext bin86 bcc libc6-dev-i386 iasl texinfo git When making the source with make world I get this error: + git clone -o xen -n git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp Initialized empty Git repository in /home/homer/xen/linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp/.git/ remote: Counting objects: 1855434, done. remote: Compressing objects: 100% (291939/291939), done. Receiving objects: 100% (1855434/1855434), 368.49 MiB | 11.00 MiB/s, done. remote: Total 1855434 (delta 1553214), reused 1847760 (delta 1546656) Resolving deltas: 100% (1553214/1553214), done. + cd linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp + git checkout -b xen/stable-2.6.32.x xen/xen/stable-2.6.32.x fatal: git checkout: branch xen/stable-2.6.32.x already exists make[3]: *** [linux-2.6-pvops.git/.valid-src] Error 128 Does anybody have an idea what i can do?

    Read the article

  • Pulling changes between two separate Mercurial repositories

    - by Rob
    I have two versions of a product and am using separate Hg repositories for each. I have made a change to one (v1.0) and I want to pull just that change into the v2.0 repository. How do I go about this? As far as I can tell, using hg pull -f -r xxxxx \\server\hg\v1.0 will pull in all changes up to the specified revision which isn't what I want. Is this possible or will I have to add the fix by hand?

    Read the article

  • In Mercurial, can I apply changes from one file to another file in the same branch?

    - by Stephen
    In the good old days of Subversion, I would sometimes derive a new file from an existing one using svn copy. Then if something changed in sections they had in common, I could still use svn merge to update the derived version. To use the example from hginit.com, say the "guac" recipe already exists, and I want to create a "superguac" that includes instructions on how to serve guacamole to 1000 raving soccer fans. Using the process I just described, I could: svn cp guac superguac svn ci -m "Created superguac by copying guac" (edit superguac) svn ci -m "Added instructions for serving 1000 raving soccer fans to superguac" (edit guac) svn ci -m "Fixed a typo in guac" svn merge -r3:4 guac superguac and thus the typo fix would be applied to superguac. Mercurial provides an hg copy command that marks a file as a copy of the original, but I'm not sure the repository structure supports a similar workflow. Here's the same example, and I carefully only edit a single file in the commit I want to use in the merge: hg cp guac superguac hg ci -m "Created superguac by copying guac" (edit superguac) hg ci -m "Added instructions for serving 1000 raving soccer fans to superguac" (edit guac) hg ci -m "Fixed a typo in guac" I now want to apply the change in guac to superguac. Is that possible? If so, what's the right command? Is there a different workflow in Mercurial that achieves the same results (limited to a single branch)?

    Read the article

  • How can I merge 2 branches in my local repository

    - by michael
    Hi, I have 2 branches in my hg repository: 1. default 2. new-feature I tried following this: http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/NamedBranches, I switch back to default by 'hg update -c default' but how can I merge my commits in 'new-feature' to 'default'. I did "hg pull new-feature", it said "repository new-feature not found"! Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How to migrate project from RCS to git? (SOLVED)

    - by Norman Ramsey
    I have a 20-year-old project that I would like to migrate from RCS to git, without losing the history. All web pages suggest that the One True Path is through CVS. But after an hour of Googling and trying different scripts, I have yet to find anything that successfully converts my RCS project tree to CVS. I'm hoping the good people at Stackoverflow will know what actually works, as opposed to what is claimed to work and doesn't. (I searched Stackoverflow using both the native SO search and a Google search, but if there's a helpful answer in the database, I missed it.) UPDATE: The rcs-fast-export tool at http://git.oblomov.eu/rcs-fast-export was repaired on 14 April 2009, and this version seems to work for me. This tool converts straight to git with no intermediate CVS. Thanks Giuseppe and Jakub!!! Things that did not work that I still remember: The rcs-to-cvs script that ships in the contrib directory of the CVS sources The rcs-fast-export tool at http://git.oblomov.eu/rcs-fast-export in versions before 13 April 2010 The rcs2cvs script found in a document called "CVS-RCS- HOW-TO Document for Linux"

    Read the article

  • How can I set up an editor to work with Git on Windows?

    - by Patrick McElhaney
    I'm trying out Git on Windows. I got to the point of trying "git commit" and I got this error: Terminal is dumb but no VISUAL nor EDITOR defined. Please supply the message using either -m or -F option. So I figured out I need to have an environment variable called EDITOR. No problem. I set it to point to Notepad. That worked, almost. The default commit message opens in Notepad. But Notepad doesn't support bare line feeds. I went out and got Notepad++. But I can't figure out how to get Notepad++ set up as the %EDITOR% in such a way that it works with Git as expected. I'm not married to Notepad++. At this point I couldn't care less what editor I use. I just want to be able to type my commit messages without using -m. So, for those of you using Git on Windows: What (free) tool do you use to edit your commit message, and what do you get when you type echo %EDITOR% at the command prompt?

    Read the article

  • Is Git ready to be recommended to my boss?

    - by Mike Weller
    I want to recomment Git to my boss as a new source control system, since we're stuck in the 90s with VSS (ouch), but are the tools and 3rd party support good enough yet? Specifically I'm talking about GUI front-ends similar to TortoiseSVN, decent visual diff/merge support, as well as stuff like email commit notifications and general support from 3rd parties like IDEs and build systems. Even though this will be used by programmers, we really need this kind of stuff in our team. I don't want to leave everyone stuck with a new tool, and even a new source control paradigm (distributed), with nothing but a command-line app and some online tutorials. This would be a step backwards. So what do you think... is Git ready? What decent tools exist for Git and what third party development apps support it? EDIT: My original question was pretty vague so I'm updating it to specifically ask for a list of available tools and 3rd party support for Git. Maybe we can get a community wiki post with a list of stuff. I also do not consider 'use subversion' to be an adequate answer. There are other reasons to use a distributed source control system other than offline editing - private and cheap branches being one of them.

    Read the article

  • How can I diff against a revision of a single file using only the default Git GUI tools?

    - by Rich
    I want to view the history of a single file, and then compare a single revision from that history against the current version. On the command line, this is easy: Run: git log -- <filename> Locate the version you want to compare, Run: git diff <commitid> -- <filename> But how can this be done using only the default Git gui tools, git gui and gitk? I know of two methods using gitk, but they're both horribly clunky: Either: Select the New View option from the View menu, Type in the full path to your file into the box labelled Enter files and directories to include, one per line, Locate the version you want to compare by looking at the highlighted items in the top pane, and click on it to select it, Right-click on the current version and select Diff selected - this, Or: Select Tree in the bottom right-hand pane, Locate the file you want to look at, right-click on it, and select Highlight this only, Locate the version you want to compare by looking at the highlighted items in the top pane, and click on it to select it, Right-click on the current version and select Diff selected - this, Click on the file in the bottom right-hand pane to jump to it in the diff output, or scroll manually. Is a better method than this?

    Read the article

  • Git: HEAD has disappeared, want to merge it into master.

    - by samgoody
    The top image is the output of: git reflog. The bottom is what GITK in GIT GUI (msysgit) shows me when I look at all branch history. The last few commits do not show on GIT GUI. Why do they not show on GITK (at least as a branch or something)? How do I merge them into master? I gather this happened when I checked out tag 0.42. Why is that not the same as master? (I had tagged the master in its latest state) When I click push, why does the remote repo claim to be up to date.. shouldn't it try to update these commits into whatever branch they are in? The first of the questions is important - I would like to begin to understand what GIT is thinking. It's more oracle than logic at this point. If it makes a difference to see the earlier history, the project is a [pretty powerful] JS color picker that can be viewed here in its entirety.

    Read the article

  • Quantifying the amount of change in a git diff?

    - by Alex Feinman
    I use git for a slightly unusual purpose--it stores my text as I write fiction. (I know, I know...geeky.) I am trying to keep track of productivity, and want to measure the degree of difference between subsequent commits. The writer's proxy for "work" is "words written", at least during the creation stage. I can't use straight word count as it ignores editing and compression, both vital parts of writing. I think I want to track: (words added)+(words removed) which will double-count (words changed), but I'm okay with that. It'd be great to type some magic incantation and have git report this distance metric for any two revisions. However, git diffs are patches, which show entire lines even if you've only twiddled one character on the line; I don't want that, especially since my 'lines' are paragraphs. Ideally I'd even be able to specify what I mean by "word" (though \W+ would probably be acceptable). Is there a flag to git-diff to give diffs on a word-by-word basis? Alternately, is there a solution using standard command-line tools to compute the metric above?

    Read the article

  • GIT: head has dissapeared, want to merge it into master.

    - by samgoody
    The top image is the output of: git reflog. The bottom is what GITK in GIT GUI (msysgit) shows me when I look at all branch history. The last few commits do not show on GIT GUI. Why do they not show on GITK (at least as a branch or something)? How do I merge them into master? I gather this happened when I checked out tag 0.42. Why is that not the same as master? (I had tagged the master in its latest state) When I click push, why does the remote repo claim to be up to date.. shouldn't it try to update these commits into whatever branch they are in? The first of the questions is important - I would like to begin to understand what GIT is thinking. It's more oracle than logic at this point. If it makes a difference to see the earlier history, the project is a [pretty powerful] JS color picker that can be viewed here in its entirety.

    Read the article

  • git contributors not showing up properly in github/etc.

    - by RobH
    I'm working in a team on a big project, but when I'm doing the merges I'd like the developers name to appear in github as the author -- currently, I'm the only one showing up since I'm merging. Context: There are 4 developers, and we're using the "integration manager" workflow using GitHub. Our "blessed" repo is under the organization, and each developer manages their pub/private repo. I've been tasked with being the integration manager, so I'm doing the merges, etc. Where I could be messing up is that I'm basically working out of my rob/project.git instead of the org/project.git -- so when I do local merges I operate on my repo then I push to both my public and the org public. (Make sense?) When I push to the blessed repo nobody else shows up as an author, since all commits are coming from me -- how can I get around this? -- Also, we all forked org/project.git, yet in the network graph nobody is showing up -- did we mess this up too? I'm used to working with git solo and don't have too much experience with handling a team of devs. Merging seems like the right thing to do, but I'm being thrown off since GitHub is kind of ignoring the other contributors. If this makes no sense at all, how do you use GitHub to manage a single project across 4 developers? (preferably the integration mgr workflow, branching i think would solve the problem) Thanks for any help

    Read the article

  • How can I diff against a revision of a single file using the default Git GUI tools?

    - by Rich
    I want to view the history of a single file, and then compare a single revision from that history against the current version. On the command line, this is easy: Run: git log -- <filename> Locate the version you want to compare, Run: git diff <commitid> -- <filename> But how can this be done in the default Git gui tools, git gui and gitk? I know of two methods using gitk, but they're both horribly clunky: Either: Select the New View option from the View menu, Type in the full path to your file into the box labelled Enter files and directories to include, one per line, Locate the version you want to compare by looking at the highlighted items in the top pane, and click on it to select it, Right-click on the current version and select Diff selected - this, Or: Select Tree in the bottom right-hand pane, Locate the file you want to look at, right-click on it, and select Highlight this only, Locate the version you want to compare by looking at the highlighted items in the top pane, and click on it to select it, Right-click on the current version and select Diff selected - this, Click on the file in the bottom right-hand pane to jump to it in the diff output, or scroll manually. Is a better method than this?

    Read the article

  • Is there any equivalence of `--depth immediates` in `git`?

    - by ???
    Currently, I'm try to setup git front-end to the Subversion repository. My Subversion repository is a single large repository which consists of several co-related projects: svn-root |-- project1 | |-- branches | |-- tags | `-- trunk |-- project2 | |-- branches | |-- tags | `-- trunk `-- project3 |-- branches |-- tags `-- trunk Because it's sometimes needs to move files between different projects, so I don't want to break the repository to separate ones. I'm going to use git-svn to setup a git front-end, but I don't see how to exactly mapping the svn to git structure. The two systems treat branches and tags very different and I doubt it is possible. To simplify the problem, I would just git svn clone the whole root directory and let branches/tags/trunk directories just sit there. But this will definitely result in too many files in branches and tags directories. In Subversion, it's easy to just set the depth of checkout to immediates, which will only checkout the branch/tag titles, without the directory contents. but I don't know if this can be done in git. The git-svn messed me up. I hope there's more elegant solution.

    Read the article

  • hg access control to central repository

    - by andreas buykx
    We come from a subversion background where we have a QA manager who gives commit rights to the central repository once he has verified that all QC activities have been done. Me and a couple of colleagues are starting to use mercurial, and we want to have a shared repository that would contain our QC-ed changes. Each of the developers hg clones the repository and pushes his changes back to the shared repository. I've read the HG init tutorial and skimmed through the red bean book, but could not find how to control who is allowed to push changes to the shared repository. How would our existing model of QA-manager controlled commits translate to a mercurial 'central' repository?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59  | Next Page >