| sarcasticCat | Does bazaar have some equivalence functionality as GIT Blame? | 05:22 |
|---|---|---|
| spiv | sarcasticCat: have you tried 'bzr blame'? :) | 05:50 |
| sarcasticCat | lol that's that first thing I tried :P | 05:50 |
| spiv | What does it lack that you're looking for? | 05:51 |
| sarcasticCat | spiv: Uhm, there's this source file (that has been worked on by multiple people), I'd like to know who've made what changes | 05:55 |
| sarcasticCat | spiv: git blame would do just that. But at my place, the cvs is bazaar, and I'd like to know if bzr is capable of this | 05:56 |
| spiv | sarcasticCat: bzr blame should tell you that. | 05:58 |
| spiv | sarcasticCat: is it not doing that for y ou? | 05:58 |
| spiv | (you may also find GUI implementations nice, like 'bzr qannotate' from the qbzr plug, or 'bzr gannotate' from the bzr-gtk plugin) | 05:59 |
| sarcasticCat | spiv: Oh, ok. Yeh, it worked. (It didn't work the first time because I was at the wrong directory) | 05:59 |
| sarcasticCat | thanks | 05:59 |
| spiv | You're welcome. | 05:59 |
| sarcasticCat | spiv: Uhm, now I get <filename> is not versioned sometimes. | 06:02 |
| sarcasticCat | What might be the reason for ths? (i'm pretty sure people have made a lot of changes gradually in these files) | 06:03 |
| sarcasticCat | *this | 06:03 |
| spiv | sarcasticCat: hmm, when you try "bzr blame <filename>"? what does "bzr status <filename>" report? | 06:05 |
| bob2 | how sure are you that it is versioned | 06:05 |
| sarcasticCat | bob2: almost 100%. (This file has different blocks of code written in different styles, so it must've been written by multiple people, obviously not at the same time. So it must be versioned) | 06:07 |
| bob2 | :/ | 06:08 |
| bob2 | er, use bzr status or bzr log to find out | 06:08 |
| sarcasticCat | well, bzr log would give me > 2000 lines (from 2009 till now) :( | 06:09 |
| bob2 | bpaste.net shell session of 'bzr log somefile | head ; bzr blame somefile | head' | 06:09 |
| sarcasticCat | Oooh, bzr status <filename> gave me "nonexistent", which doesnt make anysense | 06:10 |
| sarcasticCat | I'm staring at the file right now. o_O | 06:10 |
| sarcasticCat | the syntax is [bzr status <path to file>] , right? | 06:11 |
| bob2 | == not in bzr | 06:11 |
| bob2 | (this is all the same as git btw) | 06:12 |
| sarcasticCat | bob2: Sorry, i'm not quite following. What do you mean by "not in bzr" | 06:12 |
| sarcasticCat | ? | 06:12 |
| bob2 | the file isn't in bzr | 06:13 |
| bob2 | or your path is screwed up somehow | 06:13 |
| sarcasticCat | uhm, yeah. there's a typo in it! Sorry for the noise! | 06:14 |
| sarcasticCat | btw, is there a way to check who first added a particular file? | 06:16 |
| bob2 | bzr log --help | 06:16 |
| bob2 | -> reverse -> | head | 06:16 |
| sarcasticCat | bob2: uhm...? reverse what? | 06:17 |
| bob2 | ? | 06:17 |
| bob2 | the output of log | 06:17 |
| bob2 | prety sure it's the exact same answer as in git, just with the word 'bzr' instead of the word 'git' | 06:18 |
| sarcasticCat | Well, I know what the output of log looks like. But I dont see how that relates to my question. | 06:20 |
| bob2 | ? the first commit is the one that added it | 06:20 |
| sarcasticCat | oh, I see what you're saying. I thought you said to do a [bzr log] (w/o the filename) | 06:21 |
| mgz | morning | 08:11 |
| fullermd | Humbug. | 08:15 |
| === jml` is now known as jml | ||
| * jelmer waits for the 2.5.1 SRU tests to pass.. | 12:35 | |
| mgz | how parallel are you going? | 12:36 |
| jelmer | mgz: 4 I think | 12:36 |
| jelmer | thunderbird is also keeping one of my CPU cores busy though | 12:36 |
| mgz | ehehe | 12:37 |
| mgz | thunderbird is the antivirus of nix. | 12:37 |
| jelmer | what it's doing, I have no clue.. | 12:37 |
| fullermd | Some things man isn't meant to know. | 12:41 |
| frathgeber | hi, all. i've been googling for an answer to this question for quite a while but can't seem to find an answer | 14:05 |
| frathgeber | is it possible to configure which shared repository a branch uses? | 14:06 |
| frathgeber | situation as follows: i have a co-located workspace in /path/to/colo and a legacy shared repo in /path/to | 14:06 |
| mgz | yes, but depends what you mean by 'configure' | 14:06 |
| frathgeber | i want to choose the shared repo location | 14:07 |
| frathgeber | e.g. with bzr reconfigure | 14:07 |
| frathgeber | or by editing .bzr/branch/branch.conf or any other configuration | 14:07 |
| mgz | it will just use the one closest as it climbs the directories | 14:07 |
| frathgeber | which break my co-located workspace | 14:07 |
| frathgeber | because i want my branches to use /path/to/colo/.bzr/branches | 14:08 |
| mgz | there's no problem having a repo in colo | 14:08 |
| * jelmer luncheons | 14:08 | |
| jelmer | fsvo lunch | 14:09 |
| frathgeber | yes, but for some reason the branch suddenly picks up the shared repo in the parent | 14:09 |
| frathgeber | which obviously doesn't contain its history | 14:09 |
| frathgeber | so as a consequence my co-located workspace is now broken | 14:09 |
| mgz | jelmer, not quite yet! is there some command that will make a colo branch init a repo where it lies? | 14:09 |
| frathgeber | :) | 14:09 |
| jelmer | mgz: a bzr-colo branch or a bzr-core colocated branch? | 14:10 |
| frathgeber | i'm using bzr-colo | 14:10 |
| frathgeber | but i don't think it matters | 14:10 |
| frathgeber | it's related to the bug i just reported: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/1005532 | 14:10 |
| ubot5 | Ubuntu bug 1005532 in Bazaar "bzr reconfigure --standalone has no effect on lightweight checkouts" [Undecided,New] | 14:10 |
| jelmer | frathgeber: that does matter | 14:11 |
| frathgeber | ok | 14:11 |
| jelmer | the way in which bzr-colo stores it branches is confusing bzr | 14:11 |
| mgz | frathgeber: so, in theory there's no problem with the layout you want, just some of the conversion commands are likely too zealous about sqiushing things together | 14:11 |
| frathgeber | jelmer: yes, i realised it's confusing bzr | 14:12 |
| frathgeber | and now i'm looking for a way to un-confuse bzr | 14:12 |
| jelmer | I would be inclined to reassign this to bzr-colo | 14:12 |
| frathgeber | i.e. make it use .bzr/branches as the shared repo again | 14:12 |
| frathgeber | instead of .. | 14:12 |
| frathgeber | i think what i'm really asking is: how does bzr-colo make a branch use a shared repo in a subdirectory | 14:13 |
| frathgeber | and how can i restore this configuration if it's broken? | 14:13 |
| jelmer | frathgeber: if a branch itself doesn't have a repository bzr will look upwards | 14:14 |
| jelmer | so if you remove .bzr/branches/foo/.bzr/repository it will start using .bzr/repository again | 14:14 |
| frathgeber | there seems not to be a .bzr/branches/foo/.bzr/repository | 14:16 |
| jelmer | if .bzr/branches/foo is a standalone branch there would be | 14:16 |
| frathgeber | ok | 14:17 |
| frathgeber | so i need to bzr reconfigure --standalone .bzr/branches/foo | 14:17 |
| frathgeber | oh bugger, i see what has happened | 14:18 |
| jelmer | frathgeber: I don't think bzr-colo branches would ever want to be standalone? | 14:18 |
| jelmer | shouldn't they use the repository in .bzr/branches ? | 14:19 |
| frathgeber | my failed attempt to reconfigure did actually delete the shared repository in .bzr/branches/.bzr/repository | 14:19 |
| frathgeber | they should, yes | 14:19 |
| mgz | right, go and eat some things jelmer :) | 14:20 |
| frathgeber | but my failed attempt to reconfigure it as per bug #1005532 seemed to have killed that shared repository | 14:20 |
| ubot5 | Launchpad bug 1005532 in bzr-colo "bzr reconfigure --standalone has no effect on lightweight checkouts" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1005532 | 14:20 |
| jelmer | anyway, "lunch" first.. back in 45 min :) | 14:20 |
| frathgeber | thanks, enjoy your lunch | 14:20 |
| * frathgeber just had 'lunch' a few min ago | 14:20 | |
| mgz | frathgeber: the interesting thing for that bug is probably the steps to get into that situation | 14:21 |
| mgz | if you can reproduce from scratch, that would be usefulful to include steps for | 14:21 |
| frathgeber | yes, it actually started earlier, but i hadn't expected that that would be relevant | 14:21 |
| frathgeber | situation was as follows (and i think will be subject of another bug report): | 14:22 |
| frathgeber | co-located workspace in /path/to/colo | 14:22 |
| frathgeber | now i did bzr colo-checkout ../mybranch as described in the bug report | 14:23 |
| frathgeber | subsequently however, i rebased /path/to/colo (which in fact is also a lightweight checkout of mybranch) | 14:23 |
| frathgeber | actually, that should be legal, shouldn't it? rebasing a branch that has 2 lightweight checkouts shouldn't break either of them? | 14:26 |
| mgz | shouldn't have any impact, indeed | 14:28 |
| frathgeber | anyway, i noticed that bzr info in ../mybranch gave me the 'wrong' shared repo and indeed all bzr operations were broken | 14:30 |
| frathgeber | bzr: ERROR: Revision ... not present in ... | 14:30 |
| frathgeber | so i was looking for a way to point it back to the 'right' shared repo | 14:31 |
| mgz | right, but you're not sure which command actually broke the repo, correct? | 14:31 |
| mgz | for the bug report, that's what we need | 14:31 |
| frathgeber | correct | 14:31 |
| mgz | for recovery, it sounds like you want to make a fresh branch from another copy of the repo, as at some point the current one got deleted | 14:32 |
| frathgeber | indeed | 14:32 |
| mgz | possibly during recovery attempts after the layout got confused rather than at the same time | 14:33 |
| frathgeber | i think i had pushed everything upstream before | 14:33 |
| frathgeber | i've repeatedly done bzr reconfigure --standalone followed by bzr reconfigure --use-shared to figure out what actually happened | 14:34 |
| mgz | remember .bzr.log also records your past commands and might be useful in working out what happened when | 14:35 |
| frathgeber | very good point indeed | 14:35 |
| frathgeber | i'll have a look at that and see if it tells me sth | 14:36 |
| frathgeber | ah, there we go. i think i remember now what caused me to try those weird experiments | 14:38 |
| frathgeber | bzr reported ../mybranch was out of date, so i tried bzr up, which failed | 14:38 |
| frathgeber | saying 'branch has no revision ...' | 14:38 |
| frathgeber | mgz: i can attach .bzr.log to the bug report? | 14:39 |
| mgz | yup, you may want to trim it a little, but keeping a few commands before that update would likely be useful too | 14:40 |
| frathgeber | yeah, i found the but from where it's potentially relevant | 14:41 |
| frathgeber | odd, https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/1005532/+addcomment is broken for me, i get the generic 404 'Lost something?' | 14:43 |
| ubot5 | Ubuntu bug 1005532 in bzr-colo "bzr reconfigure --standalone has no effect on lightweight checkouts" [Undecided,New] | 14:43 |
| frathgeber | refreshing helped | 14:44 |
| mgz | odd, on post or get? | 14:45 |
| frathgeber | get | 14:46 |
| frathgeber | i think it was because jelmer had made a status change in the meantime | 14:46 |
| mgz | ah, I know what it is | 14:46 |
| mgz | project changed from bzr to bzr-colo and there's no redirect | 14:47 |
| frathgeber | ah, right | 14:48 |
| frathgeber | that's fair enough | 14:48 |
| frathgeber | i'll try to rescue my shared repo and maybe someone can make some sense from my bzr.log | 14:49 |
| mgz | creating a fresh branch from the bits you pushed upstream is probably easiest | 14:50 |
| frathgeber | yep | 14:51 |
| frathgeber | mid-term i'll probably switch to colo-core | 14:53 |
| frathgeber | when is that going to make it into the release? | 14:53 |
| mgz | it's in 2.5, with a few ui polish issues | 14:54 |
| mgz | neil was talking about making bzr-colo use the new core colo support where available | 14:54 |
| frathgeber | ok. where can i find documentation on core colo? | 15:00 |
| frathgeber | canonical.com is really slow today... | 15:02 |
| mgz | not sure what we have on the user-facing side | 15:02 |
| frathgeber | nothing obious at least :) | 15:02 |
| frathgeber | it seems i've lost the 2 most recent commits | 17:12 |
| frathgeber | now the branch is in some weird limbo and appears unusable | 17:13 |
| frathgeber | e.g. bzr: ERROR: Could not determine revno for ... because its ancestry shows a ghost at ... | 17:14 |
| jelmer | frathgeber: did you perhaps remove any of the repository directories? | 17:23 |
| jelmer | one repository probably has/had mroe revisions than the other | 17:23 |
| frathgeber | i didn't conciously remove any of the repository directories | 17:24 |
| frathgeber | but quite possibly one of the commands i ran did (see https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr-colo/+bug/1005532/+attachment/3166962/+files/bzr.log) | 17:24 |
| ubot5 | Ubuntu bug 1005532 in bzr-colo "bzr reconfigure --standalone has no effect on lightweight checkouts" [Undecided,New] | 17:24 |
| frathgeber | is there anything i can do to rescue that branch? i still have the working tree and also the dirstate, so i could branch from upstream and diff to see the changes and try to re-create those 2 missing commits | 17:29 |
| frathgeber | is there an easier/safer way to do that? | 17:29 |
| jelmer | frathgeber: it's probably easiest to talk to somebody familiar with bzr-colo, I'm not entirely sure what all the colo- commands do | 17:31 |
| frathgeber | ok. but assuming the repository is lost (which is what i'm assuming now), do i have better options to ressurect those 2 lost commits than what i described above? | 17:35 |
| vila | frathgeber: yup. On the other hand, 'find . -name pack-names -print' should tell you where some repository may be hidden and hopefully recoverable (I'm here for less than ~5 minutes) | 17:37 |
| frathgeber | ok, will run that | 17:38 |
| frathgeber | alas it's gone | 17:39 |
| frathgeber | i'll go the manual route then | 17:40 |
| frathgeber | thanks for your help jelmer, mgz, vila | 17:40 |
| fullermd | Oh look, 2.5.1 takes lplibrarian into the hundred millions. Yeesh. | 19:47 |
| jelmer | fullermd: whu? | 19:53 |
| * fullermd shrugs | 19:54 | |
| fullermd | Doesn't mean anything. Just cute. | 19:55 |
| dodgerblue | hello all | 21:33 |
| dodgerblue | do you have any idea how can i commit so i can get a partial version like <version>.1.1 ? | 21:34 |
| dodgerblue | or <version>.1.2? | 21:34 |
| bob2 | why? | 21:41 |
| dodgerblue | bob2: i just wanna know how | 21:42 |
| bob2 | ok! | 21:42 |
| wgz | dodgerblue: that happens when you commit a merge of another commit | 22:06 |
| dodgerblue | wgz: thanks :) | 22:07 |
| jave | do I need to install the "colo" plugin if I want to try colocated branches in bzr 2.5? | 22:11 |
| wgz | jave: nope, that's a different thing | 22:17 |
| jave | okay. were can I find proper docs on colocated branches? | 22:23 |
| jelmer | jave: there aren't any at the moment, colocated branches are still experimental in 2.5 | 22:24 |
| jave | ah well. | 22:25 |
| jelmer | I think the main documentation is some emails to the mailing list at this point. | 22:25 |
| jave | is colo branches usable at all in 2.5? | 22:25 |
| jave | or should I wait? | 22:26 |
| jelmer | jave: I wouldn't recommend it for production use | 22:26 |
| jave | okay thanks, | 22:26 |
| jelmer | if you're working on plugins etc and want to make them ready for colocated branches then it might be worth to have a look at them | 22:26 |
| jave | no I just wanted to try out colo branches on the emacs repo | 22:27 |
| vadi2 | bzr viz's UI is very broken for me in 2.5.0. I can't scroll all the way to the top of the revisions history. Does anyone else have this? | 22:51 |
| jelmer | vadi2: it's fine here | 22:53 |
| jelmer | vadi2: what version of bzr-gtk is that? | 22:53 |
| vadi2 | 0.103.0+bzr792-1ubuntu1 | 22:54 |
| vadi2 | This is what I can scroll up to: http://i.imgur.com/i7mBv.png you can tell it's not the latest one because the arrow button is still pressable. The only way I can get to the top is via the keyboard up/down buttons - and when I switch that way, it fails to scroll, but does select the revision properly/ | 22:56 |
| jelmer | vadi2: I would recommend filing a bug, I haven't seen any bugs about this issue before | 23:00 |
| vadi2 | alright | 23:01 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
