Search Results

Search found 4296 results on 172 pages for 'git clone'.

Page 10/172 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

• Private Git repo using Smart HTTP with LDAP authentification

  - by ALOToverflow

  I've been crawling the interwebz and getting my hands dirty for the last few days, but I can't seem to make it all work together. I managed to get a HTTP repo working with Ubuntu 10.04 over Smart HTTP (pull and push over HTTP) for a single repo. This means that I do the initial setup over SSH to the server (git init --bare) and after that the clients can pull and push to it (git clone http://servername/allgitrepos/repo.git). Unfortunately it's impossible to add a new repo without SSHing to the server and adding it manually) i.e. git push http://servername/allgitrepos/repo2.git (allgitrepos is available for everyone to read-write and execute) would fail talking about git update-server-info (which seems to be a general error message). So far the repository is anonymous, so I would like to authenticate using LDAP and also use the LDAP creds to make the git commit. So, how can I push new repos to the server and how can I use the LDAP creds to make the git commit. Thanks

  Read the article

• How do I force fetching of tags if I have the --no-tags option set

  - by douglas.meyer

  Whenever I run git fetch it fetches all the tags from origin. In a project with lots of tags, this can get quite bothersome. So I ran git config remote.origin.tagopt --no-tags so fetching will no-longer fetch tags. However, there are some times when I do want to fetch tags, or a single tag. Does anyone know how to do this? (besides removing that configuration, and running git fetch --no-tags every time) Thanks!

  Read the article

• How Do You Get the bufspec While Using Vimdiff Through Git

  - by Elizabeth Buckwalter

  I've read Vimdiff and Viewing differences with Vimdiff plus doing various google searches using things like "vimdiff multiple", "vimdiff git", "vimdiff commands" etc. When using do or diffg I get the error "More than two buffers in diff mode, don't know which one to use". When using diffg v:fname_in I get "No matching buffer for v:fname_in". From the vimdiff documentation: :[range]diffg[et] [bufspec] Modify the current buffer to undo difference with another buffer. If [bufspec] is given, that buffer is used. If [bufspec] refers to the current buffer then nothing happens. Otherwise this only works if there is one other buffer in diff mode. and more: When 'diffexpr' is not empty, Vim evaluates to obtain a diff file in the format mentioned. These variables are set to the file names used: v:fname_in original file v:fname_new new version of the same file v:fname_out resulting diff file So, I need to get the name of bufspec, but the default variables (fname_in, fname_new, and fname_out) aren't set. I ran the command git mergetool on a linux box through a terminal. [Edit] A partial solution that bred more questions. I used the "filename" at the bottom of the buffer. It's only a half answer, because occasionally I get a file does not exist error. I believe it's consistently the remote version of the file that "does not exist". I suspect this has something to do with git and indexing. How do you get the bufspec value consistently while using vimdiff through git-mergetool?

  Read the article

• Git-svn branch hoses dcommit when using an odd branch structure

  - by Chuck Vose

  I had a boss, past-tense, who decided to put svn branches in the same folder as trunk. Normally, this wouldn't affect me that much but since I'm using git-svn things are going so well. After I did a fetch it created a folder for each branch in my root folder so I have three folders, drupal, trunk, and client. The drupal folder is git's master branch, client and trunk are the svn branches. Merging and committing works great, in fact everything git related is working superb. However dcommit is totally hosed, it's trying to commit a folder called client and one called trunk. I can't even imagine what havoc this would cause for svn later on. So my question is, what have I done wrong in my .git/config and is there anything I can do to fix this or am I going to have to suffer and go back to using svn? Please don't make me go back. I don't think I can take it anymore. Bastard boss knows how to leave a legacy. [svn-remote "svn"] url = https://svn.mydomain.com/svn/project_name fetch = trunk:refs/remotes/trunk branches = *:refs/remotes/* tags = tags/*:refs/remotes/tags/* Normally the branches line would look like this (when using --stdlayout): branches = branches/*:refs/remotes/branches/* ls output is thus: $ ls client/ docs/ drupal/ sql/ trunk/

  Read the article

• git-svn cannot create a branch to follow SVN branching

  - by Serhiy Yakovyn

  Hello everybody, I'm struggling with the following issue. When I continue fetching revisions from SVN with git svn fetch I'm getting the following error (removed https to be able to post question): *Found possible branch point: somecompany.com/product/trunk = somecompany.com/product/branches/deep/branches/product-001, 72666 Found branch parent: (refs/remotes/deep/branches/product-001) b685b7b92813885fdf 6b8e2663daf884bf504b14 Following parent with do_switch Successfully followed parent error: 'refs/remotes/deep' exists; cannot create 'refs/remotes/deep/branches/product-001' fatal: Cannot lock the ref 'refs/remotes/deep/branches/product-001'. update-ref -m r72667 refs/remotes/deep/branches/product-001 df51920e8f0a53f26507 c2679eb6a9dbad91e0d6: command returned error: 128* This happened because I was fetching revisions using the default filter for SVN branches: [svn-remote "svn"] url = https://somecompany.com/someproduct fetch = trunk:refs/remotes/trunk branches = branches/*:refs/remotes/* tags = tags/*:refs/remotes/tags/* Now, I have the line below added, but it's too late: branches = branches/deep/branches/*:refs/remotes/deep/branches/* I have tried to fix this by using git reset to remove all the commits. Actually I can see from the error message that git is trying right thing, but cannot because of the branch remotes/deep being existing. I have tried to search for 2 possible solutions: 1. Remove that branch (remotes/deep), but as it is tracked by git as a remote, I was not able to find any solution for that. 2. Remove the whole history related to that branch. No success too :( Does anybody know how to deal with my issue? Thank you in advance, Serhiy Y

  Read the article

• How to combine two separate unrelated Git repositories into one with single history timeline

  - by Antony

  I have two unrelated (not sharing any ancestor check in) Git repositories, one is a super repository which consists a number of smaller projects (Lets call it repository A). Another one is just a makeshift local Git repository for a smaller project (lets call it repository B). Graphically, it would look like this A0-B0-C0-D0-E0-F0-G0-HEAD (repo A) A0-B0-C0-D0-E0-F0-G0-HEAD (remote/master bare repo pulled & pushed from repo A) A1-B1-C1-D1-E1-HEAD (repo B) Ideally, I would really like to merge repo B into repo A with a single history timeline. So it would appear that I originally started project in repo A. Graphically, this would be the ideal end result A0-A1-B1-B0-D1-C0-D0-E0-F0-G0-E1-H(from repo B)-HEAD (new repo A) A0-A1-B1-B0-D1-C0-D0-E0-F0-G0-E1-H(from repo B)-HEAD (remote/master bare repo pulled & pushed from repo A) I have been doing some reading with submodules and subtree (Pro Git is a pretty good book by the way), but both of them seem to cater solution towards maintaining two separate branch with sub module being able to pull changes from upstream and subtree being slightly less headache. Both solution require additional and specialized git commands to handle check ins and sync between master and sub tree/module branch. Both solution also result in multiple time-lines (with --squash you even get 3 timelines with subtree). The closest solution from SO seems to talk about "graft", but is that really it? The goal is to have a single unified repository where I can pull/push check-ins, so that there are no more repo B, just repo A in the end.

  Read the article

• How to clone a HDD and then use the clone with VMware (so that Windows works!)?

  - by Ahmad

  I have a system on which Windows 7 is installed, and I am trying to make a clone of its HDD image, which I then want to use in my main PC with VMware, so that I can boot Windows 7 off the cloned HDD. I used Ultimate Boot CD v5.1.1 with the system whose HDD I wanted to clone, and I cloned it using EaseUs Disk Copy, which comes with Ultimate Boot CD. The source HDD was 250 GB in size which had 3 partitions, while the USB HDD I attached to the system, which was supposed to be the destination/clone HDD, was 320 GB in size. I chose to create an exact replica, and so 250 GB worth of data (partitions, etc.) was copied exactly, and the rest of the space was un-allocated. I now connected this USB HDD to my main PC, fired up VMware Workstation 8 and defined a new Virtual Machine, and chose to boot off the USB HDD. Result is that when Windows is booting (from the cloned HDD inside VMware), I get the blue screen error before I reach the login screen. How can I change my methodology so that Windows even boots from the clone? I can change any tools I use, etc.

  Read the article

• git repository sync between computers, when moving around?

  - by Johan

  Hi Let's say that I have a desktop pc and a laptop, and sometimes I work on the desktop and sometimes I work on the laptop. What is the easiest way to move a git repository back and forth? I want the git repositories to be identical, so that I can continue where I left of at the other computer. I would like to make sure that I have the same branches and tags on both of the computers. Thanks Johan Note: I know how to do this with SubVersion, but I'm curious on how this would work with git. If it is easier, I can use a third pc as classical server that the two pc:s can sync against. Note: Both computers are running Linux. Update: So let's try XANI:s idea with a bare git repo on a server, and the push command syntax from KingCrunch. In this example there is two clients and one server. So let's create the server part first. ssh user@server mkdir -p ~/git_test/workspace cd ~/git_test/workspace git --bare init So then from one of the other computers I try to get a copy of the repo with clone: git clone user@server:~/git_test/workspace/ Initialized empty Git repository in /home/user/git_test/repo1/workspace/.git/ warning: You appear to have cloned an empty repository. Then go into that repo and add a file: cd workspace/ echo "test1" > testfile1.txt git add testfile1.txt git commit testfile1.txt -m "Added file testfile1.txt" git push origin master Now the server is updated with testfile1.txt. Anyway, let's see if we can get this file from the other computer. mkdir -p ~/git_test/repo2 cd ~/git_test/repo2 git clone user@server:~/git_test/workspace/ cd workspace/ git pull And now we can see the testfile. At this point we can edit it with some more content and update the server again. echo "test2" >> testfile1.txt git add testfile1.txt git commit -m "Test2" git push origin master Then we go back to the first client and do a git pull to see the updated file. And now I can move back and forth between the two computers, and add a third if I like to.

  Read the article

• Tips on upgrading CVS to git/hg?

  - by meder

  We still use CVS, I use git and hg for my personal use though I'm still a novice at both, but I realize they're much more modern and better, faster, distributed, etc. It's just everyone is so accustomed to CVS that I feel a whole slew of issues could arise if I were to be the one that recommended and actually did the upgrading/porting/transitioning of our current CVS server to git or hg. Has anyone actually done this, recently? Could you offer any insight or tips in terms of influencing people to use git/hg, and just generic tips on the actual updating/transitioning if it were to take place? Are there common issues I should be aware of just in general?

  Read the article

• Git clone/push/pull - where's that username comes from?

  - by Kuroki Kaze

  I've set up gitosis and able to pull/push through ssh. Gitosis is installed on Debian Lenny server, I'm using git from windows machine (msysgit). The strange thing, if I enable loglevel = DEBUG in gitosis.conf, I see something like this when doing any actions with gitosis server: D:\Kaze\source\test-project>git pull origin master DEBUG:gitosis.serve.main:Got command "git-upload-pack 'test_project.git'" DEBUG:gitosis.access.haveAccess:Access check for '[email protected]' as 'writable' on 'test_project.git'... DEBUG:gitosis.access.haveAccess:Stripping .git suffix from 'test_project.git', new value 'test_project' DEBUG:gitosis.group.getMembership:found '[email protected]' in 'test' DEBUG:gitosis.access.haveAccess:Access ok for '[email protected]' as 'writable' on 'test_project' DEBUG:gitosis.access.haveAccess:Using prefix 'repositories' for 'test_project' DEBUG:gitosis.serve.main:Serving git-upload-pack 'repositories/test_project.git' From 192.168.175.128:test_project * branch master -> FETCH_HEAD Already up-to-date. Question is: why am I *[email protected]? This email is in global user.email config variable, too. Yesterday, when the gitosis was installed, it seen me as kaze@KAZE, this is the name under which I was added to gitosis-admin group (and it worked). But today git (or gitosis) started to see me as [email protected]. This is true for all repositories I push or clone. I had to add this address to gitosis.conf directly on server to be able to edit configs again (it worked). There is 2 public keys in keydir: [email protected] and [email protected], their content is identical and they have kaze@KAZE at end. Origin URL looks like git@lennyserver:test_project. Now, the question is - why Git (or gitosis) suddenly decided to call me by email instead of name@machinename? I've changed a couple things trying to set up Gitosis (updated git on server to 1.6.0 for example), but maybe I broke something in my local git installation?

  Read the article

• github like workflow on private server over ssh

  - by Jesse

  I have an server (available via ssh) on the internet that my friend and I use for working on projects together. We have started using git for source control. Our setup currently is as follows: Friend created repository on server with git init named project.friend.git I cloned project.friend.git on server to project.jesse.git I then cloned project.jesse.git on server to my local machine using git clone jesse@server:/git_repos/project.jesse.git I work on my local machine and commit to the local machine. When I want to push my changes to the project.jesse.git on server I use git push origin master. My friend is working on project.friend.git. When I want to get his changes I do pull jesse@server:/git_repos/project.friend.git. Everything seems to be working fine, however, I am now getting the following error when I do git push origin master: localpc:project.jesse jesse$ git push origin master Counting objects: 100, done. Delta compression using up to 2 threads. Compressing objects: 100% (76/76), done. Writing objects: 100% (76/76), 15.98 KiB, done. Total 76 (delta 50), reused 0 (delta 0) warning: updating the current branch warning: Updating the currently checked out branch may cause confusion, warning: as the index and work tree do not reflect changes that are in HEAD. warning: As a result, you may see the changes you just pushed into it warning: reverted when you run 'git diff' over there, and you may want warning: to run 'git reset --hard' before starting to work to recover. warning: warning: You can set 'receive.denyCurrentBranch' configuration variable to warning: 'refuse' in the remote repository to forbid pushing into its warning: current branch. warning: To allow pushing into the current branch, you can set it to 'ignore'; warning: but this is not recommended unless you arranged to update its work warning: tree to match what you pushed in some other way. warning: warning: To squelch this message, you can set it to 'warn'. warning: warning: Note that the default will change in a future version of git warning: to refuse updating the current branch unless you have the warning: configuration variable set to either 'ignore' or 'warn'. To jesse@server:/git_repos/project.jesse.git c455cb7..e9ec677 master -> master Is this warning anything I need to be worried about? Like I said, everything seems to be working. My friend is able to pull my changes in from my branch. I have the clone on the server so he can access it since he does not have access to my local machine. Is there something that could be done better? Thanks!

  Read the article

• View a git diff-tree in a reasonable format

  - by Josh

  Howdy, I'm about to do a git svn dcommit to our svn repo -- and as is recommended in a number of places, I wanted to figure out exactly what I was going to be committing with a dry run. As such I ran: git svn dcommit -n This produced output: Committing to http://somerepo/svn/branches/somebranch diff-tree 1b937dacb302908602caedf1798171fb1b7afc81~1 1b937dacb302908602caedf1798171fb1b7afc81 How do I view this in a format that I can consume as a human? A list of modified files comes to mind. This is probably easy, but running git diff-tree on those hashes gives me a reference to a directory and a some other hashes, as well as some numbers. Not quite sure what to make of it. Thanks very much, Josh

  Read the article

• Cherry-picking from git to svn (or, How to keep a project history in git and releases in svn)

  - by Jawa

  I'm in a position where I'm the only one using git, everybody else is using svn. I've used 'git svn' to connect to the team svn and mostly it works just fine. Lately, I've started a project initially on my own, separate git repo and now I need to merge stuff from it to the svn. However, I still would like to keep tweaking the implementation in my own privacy between releases. So, what would be the most straightforward way to cherry-pick some commits from my private repo to the svn-cloned repo? Requirement is to keep full local history and have only one svn commit for each pick. Or is there some squashing to be done? As a method to achieve this, is there a way to get the private repo as another origin for the svn-cloned repo?

  Read the article

• Using Mercurial repository inside a Git one: Feasible? Sane?

  - by Portablejim

  I am thinking on creating a Mercurial repository under a Git repository. e.g. ..../git-repository/directory/hg-repo/ The 2 repositories Is it possible to manage (keeping your sanity)? How similiar is it to this? I am a computer science student at University. I manage my work in Git, mainly as a distribution mechanism (after realizing that rsync fails when you have changes in more than one place) between my desktop and usb drive. I try use of Git as a VCS as I do work. I have finished a semester where I did a small group project to prepare for a larger group project next year. We had to use Subversion, and experienced the joys of a centralised VCS (including downtime). I tried to keep the subversion repository separate to my Git repository for the subject**, however it was annoying that it was seperate (not in the place where I store assignments). I therefore moved to using an Subversion repository inside my Git repository. As I think ahead (maybe I am thinking too far ahead) I realise that I will have to try and convince people to use a DVCS and Mercurial will probably be the one that is preferred (Windows and Mac GUI support, closer to Subversion). Having done some research into the whole Git vs Mercurial debate (however not used Mercurial at all) I still prefer Git. Can I have a Mercurial repository inside a Git one without going mad (or it ruining something)? Or is it something that I should not consider at all? (Or is it a bad question that should be deleted?) ** I think outside of Australia it is called a course

  Read the article

• Rebasing a branch which is public

  - by Dror

  I'm failing to understand how to use git-rebase, and I consider the following example. Let's start a repository in ~/tmp/repo: $ git init Then add a file foo $ echo "hello world" > foo which is then added and committed: $ git add foo $ git commit -m "Added foo" Next, I started a remote repository. In ~/tmp/bare.git I ran $ git init --bare In order to link repo to bare.git I ran $ git remote add origin ../bare.git/ $ git push --set-upstream origin master Next, lets branch, add a file and set an upstream for the new branch b1: $ git checkout -b b1 $ echo "bar" > foo2 $ git add foo2 $ git commit -m "add foo2 in b1" $ git push --set-upstream origin b1 Now it is time to switch back to master and change something there: $ echo "change foo" > foo $ git commit -a -m "changed foo in master" $ git push At this point in master the file foo contain changed foo, while in b1 it is still hello world. Finally, I want to sync b1 with the progress made in master. $ git checkout b1 $ git fetch origin $ git rebase origin/master At this point git st returns: # On branch b1 # Your branch and 'origin/b1' have diverged, # and have 2 and 1 different commit each, respectively. # (use "git pull" to merge the remote branch into yours) # nothing to commit, working directory clean At this point the content of foo in the branch b1 is change foo as well. So what does this warning mean? I expected I should do a git push, git suggests to do git pull... According to this answer, this is more or less it, and in his comment @FrerichRaabe explicitly say that I don't need to do a pull. What's going on here? What is the danger, how should one proceed? How should the history be kept consistent? What is the interplay between the case described above and the following citation: Do not rebase commits that you have pushed to a public repository. taken from pro git book. I guess it is somehow related, and if not I would love to know why. What's the relation between the above scenario and the procedure I described in this post.

  Read the article

• Git workflow for small teams

  - by janos

  I'm working on a git workflow to implement in a small team. The core ideas in the workflow: there is a shared project master that all team members can write to all development is done exclusively on feature branches feature branches are code reviewed by a team member other than the branch author the feature branch is eventually merged into the shared master and the cycle starts again The article explains the steps in this cycle in detail: https://github.com/janosgyerik/git-workflows-book/blob/small-team-workflow/chapter05.md Does this make sense or am I missing something?

  Read the article

• How to cleanly add after-the-fact commits from the same feature into git tree

  - by Dennis

  I am one of two developers on a system. I make most of the commits at this time period. My current git workflow is as such: there is master branch only (no develop/release) I make a new branch when I want to do a feature, do lots of commits, and then when I'm done, I merge that branch back into master, and usually push it to remote. ...except, I am usually not done. I often come back to alter one thing or another and every time I think it is done, but it can be 3-4 commits before I am really done and move onto something else. Problem The problem I have now is that .. my feature branch tree is merged and pushed into master and remote master, and then I realize that I am not really done with that feature, as in I have finishing touches I want to add, where finishing touches may be cosmetic only, or may be significant, but they still belong to that one feature I just worked on. What I do now Currently, when I have extra after-the-fact commits like this, I solve this problem by rolling back my merge, and re-merging my feature branch into master with my new commits, and I do that so that git tree looks clean. One clean feature branch branched out of master and merged back into it. I then push --force my changes to origin, since my origin doesn't see much traffic at the moment, so I can almost count that things will be safe, or I can even talk to other dev if I have to coordinate. But I know it is not a good way to do this in general, as it rewrites what others may have already pulled, causing potential issues. And it did happen even with my dev, where git had to do an extra weird merge when our trees diverged. Other ways to solve this which I deem to be not so great Next best way is to just make those extra commits to the master branch directly, be it fast-forward merge, or not. It doesn't make the tree look as pretty as in my current way I'm solving this, but then it's not rewriting history. Yet another way is to wait. Maybe wait 24 hours and not push things to origin. That way I can rewrite things as I see fit. The con of this approach is time wasted waiting, when people may be waiting for a fix now. Yet another way is to make a "new" feature branch every time I realize I need to fix something extra. I may end up with things like feature-branch feature-branch-html-fix, feature-branch-checkbox-fix, and so on, kind of polluting the git tree somewhat. Is there a way to manage what I am trying to do without the drawbacks I described? I'm going for clean-looking history here, but maybe I need to drop this goal, if technically it is not a possibility.

  Read the article

• git workflow for separating commits

  - by gman

  Best practices with git (or any VCS for that matter) is supposed to be to have each commit do the smallest change possible. But, that doesn't match how I work at all. For example I recently I needed to add some code that checked if the version of a plugin to my system matched the versions the system supports. If not print a warning that the plugin probably requires a newer version of the system. While writing that code I decided I wanted the warnings to be colorized. I already had code that colorized error message so I edited that code. That code was in the startup module of one entry to the system. The plugin checking code was in another path that didn't use that entry point so I moved the colorization code into a separate module so both entry points could use it. On top of that, in order to test my plugin checking code works I need to go edit UI/UX code to make sure it tells the user "You need to upgrade". When all is said and done I've edited 10 files, changed dependencies, the 2 entry points are now both dependant on the colorization code, etc etc. Being lazy I'd probably just git add . && git commit -a the whole thing. Spending 10-15 minutes trying to manipulate all those changes into 3 to 6 smaller commits seems frustrating which brings up the question Are there workflows that work for you or that make this process easier? I don't think I can some how magically always modify stuff in the perfect order since I don't know that order until after I start modifying and seeing what comes up. I know I can git add --interactive etc but it seems, at least for me, kind of hard to know what I'm grabbing exactly the correct changes so that each commit is actually going to work. Also, since the changes are sitting in the current directory it doesn't seem like it would be easy to run tests on each commit to make sure it's going to work short of stashing all the changes. And then, if it were to stash and then run the tests, if I missed a few lines or accidentally added a few too many lines I have no idea how I'd easily recover from that. (as in either grab the missing lines from the stash and then put the rest back or take the few extra lines I shouldn't have grabbed and shove them into the stash for the next commit. Thoughts? Suggestions? PS: I hope this is an appropriate question. The help says development methodologies and processes

  Read the article

• Git autocomplete is asking for a password, not sure why

  - by Soldier.moth

  I'm running into an issue with autocomplete using git... I am using ubuntu 12.10 and when I perform the following keystrokes g i t Space Bar Tab I am presented with the error Pseudo-terminal will not be allocated because stdin is not a terminal. and prompted for a password. I am not clear how to go about troubleshooting this error, I have tried uninstalling and reinstalling git to no avail. Screenshot of terminal with error:

  Read the article

• How do I clone an Ubuntu server under VMWare

  - by dave

  I have a Ubuntu 12.04 server running under VMWare. As best as I can tell, the VMWare vmbk file has been corrupted. The server is operating normally, but this is preventing backups (using Veeam). To remedy this, I'd like to create a duplicate VM without the corruption issue. However, with the corrupted file VMWare can't help me, eg. create a simple clone. I can create a new VM. How do I clone the configuration / data from my problematic server into the new one? Updated: just to clarify: I realise I can't use the VMWare clone tools. I will manually create a new VM (with a base O/S if necessary). How to I replicate the O/S and data from one VM into another?

  Read the article

• Clone drive in Windows

  - by ERJ

  I have two 2 TB external USB hard drives, call them HD1 and HD2. HD1 is USB 2, HD2 is USB 3. Each drive contains exactly one NTFS partition. I want to clone HD1 to HD2, because it's newer and much, much faster. What's the best way to do this? I don't want to do a copy-and-paste, I want to clone the whole partition. The new drive is actually a few bytes larger, so this should be possible? I don't have a second drive that can hold the image, so it would have to clone directly to the other disk (not to a file). How can I accomplish this on Windows 7? I know about Clonezilla but I would prefer not to have to boot from a CD or anything, as I don't have the capability to do that right now. I want to know if there's a way to do this while running Windows.

  Read the article

• Installinf Xen 4.0.1 in Ubuntu 10.10

  - by Hiranth

  make -f buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops build make[3]: Entering directory /home/hirantha/xen-4.0.1' set -ex; \ if ! [ -d linux-2.6-pvops.git ]; then \ rm -rf linux-2.6-pvops.git linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp; \ mkdir linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp; rmdir linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp; \ git clone -o xen -n git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp; \ (cd linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp; git checkout -b xen/stable-2.6.32.x xen/xen/stable-2.6.32.x ); \ mv linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp linux-2.6-pvops.git; \ fi + '[' -d linux-2.6-pvops.git ']' + rm -rf linux-2.6-pvops.git linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp + mkdir linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp + rmdir linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp + 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/hirantha/xen-4.0.1/linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp/.git/ fatal: Unable to look up git.kernel.org (port 9418) (Name or service not known) make[3]: *** [linux-2.6-pvops.git/.valid-src] Error 128 make[3]: Leaving directory/home/hirantha/xen-4.0.1' make[2]: * [linux-2.6-pvops-install] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory /home/hirantha/xen-4.0.1' make[1]: *** [install-kernels] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory/home/hirantha/xen-4.0.1' make: * [world] Error 2 hirantha@hirantha-desktop:~/xen-4.0.1$ ^C hirantha@hirantha-desktop:~/xen-4.0. What is this error? How can i solve this?

  Read the article

• What is a good git server frontend for self hosted git repositories

  - by Ritesh M Nayak

  I am planning on deploying git for a project I am currently working on and was wondering if there are any free softwares that provide an easy to use web view of the git repository. I am primarily interested in using the front end to track changes, see diff information etc. There is a list of such front ends available here. Does anyone have any experience with any of these ? Which one would you suggest An open source clone of github would do just fine actually :D but I know thats too much to ask .

  Read the article

• Deploying only changed part of a website with git to ftp (svn2web for git)

  - by Elazar Leibovich

  I'm having a website with many big images file. The source (as well as the images) is maintained with git. I wish to deploy that via ftp to a bluehost-like cheap server. I do not wish to deploy all the website each time (so that I won't have to upload too many unchanged files over and over), but to do roughly the following: In a git repository, mark the last deployed revision with a tag "deployed". When I say "deploy revision X", find out which files has changed between revision X and revision tagged as deploy, and upload just them. It is similar in spirit to svn2web. But I want that for DVCS. Mercurial alternative will be considered. It's a pretty simple script to write, but I'd rather not to reinvent the wheel if there's some similar script on the web. Capistrano and fab seems to know only how to push the whole revision, in their SCM integration. So I don't think I can currently use them.

  Read the article

• Git push origin master

  - by user306472

  I am new to git and recently set up a new account with github. I'm following a rails tutorial from Michael Hartl online ( http://www.railstutorial.org/book#fig:github_first_page ) and followed his instructions to set up my git which were also inline with the setup instructions at github. Anyways, the "Next Steps" section on github were: mkdir sample_app cd sample_app git init touch README git add README git commit -m 'first commit' git remote add origin [email protected]:rosdabos55/sample_app.git git push origin master I got all the way to the last instruction (git push origin master) without any problem. When I entered that last line into my terminal, however, I got this error message: "fatal: No path specified. See 'man git-pull' for valid url syntax." What might I be doing wrong?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >