Claus Reinke wrote:
I just made this binary available from the darcs download page.
Here's a link:
http://www.haskell.org/~simonmar/darcs-2.0.2+75.zip
This is built with curl 7.18.2 and has pipelining enabled.
Cheers,
Simon
Thanks, Simon!
I've unpacked the 2.0.0 (with cygwin) package as a
I just made this binary available from the darcs download page. Here's a link:
http://www.haskell.org/~simonmar/darcs-2.0.2+75.zip
This is built with curl 7.18.2 and has pipelining enabled.
Cheers,
Simon
Thanks, Simon!
I've unpacked the 2.0.0 (with cygwin) package as a basis,
but in there
I just made this binary available from the darcs download page. Here's a link:
http://www.haskell.org/~simonmar/darcs-2.0.2+75.zip
This is built with curl 7.18.2 and has pipelining enabled.
Cheers,
Simon
Simon Marlow wrote:
The attached patches make darcs build on Windows for me using
The attached patches make darcs build on Windows for me using GHC 6.8.3. I
ran 'make test' and most tests passed, except
TESTS FAILED!
pull.sh
which is much better than I've seen before.
The threadWaitRead issue is even more subtle than I realised. In fact
darcs does respond to ^C,
Simon Marlow wrote:
Claus Reinke wrote:
|Do you get this using darcs 2? We would appreciate a bug report!
Well, okay, I'd like to switch to darcs 2 (forgot that Simon had already
convinced me earlier..). But according to darcs.net:
- the latest stable release is 2.0.2
- the latest win
Claus Reinke wrote:
|Do you get this using darcs 2? We would appreciate a bug report!
Well, okay, I'd like to switch to darcs 2 (forgot that Simon had already
convinced me earlier..). But according to darcs.net:
- the latest stable release is 2.0.2
- the latest windows binary bundles a
|Do you get this using darcs 2? We would appreciate a bug report!
Well, okay, I'd like to switch to darcs 2 (forgot that Simon had
already convinced me earlier..). But according to darcs.net:
- the latest stable release is 2.0.2
- the latest windows binary bundles are 2.0.0
- there i
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 5:18 AM, Claus Reinke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The earlier we start collecting _concrete_ instances of such silent
> command failures, the better.
Unfortunately, I can't remember what I was doing at the time, as this
occurred a few months ago.
A number of git commands are implemented as crufty shell scripts that
don't check the results of running its plumbing commands. I've been
bitten by silent command failure on a number of occasions. Just
saying.
The earlier we start collecting _concrete_ instances of such silent
command failures,
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Claus Reinke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Much as I'd have liked to advocate darcs 2 over git for ghc, I
> couldn't really have justified that until the little bugs are known to
> be fixed.
A number of git commands are implemented as crufty shell scripts that
don'
While I'm nominally a fan of darcs (mostly because it was the first
vcs I've seen that is simple when it works, including things like putting
repos on webservers, being able to initialize repos without having to
read the manual, or being able to see changes without being connected
to the reference
11 matches
Mail list logo