On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 09:35:23AM -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> Please be sure to test the bindings.
Also, a ruby bindings test segfaults.
I've found this in an OpenBSD ports build, hence no debug symbols
in this trace. I can rebuild it with debug symbols if required.
Trace:
(gdb) bt
#0 0x0
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 09:35:23AM -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>
>> A little late, but never never, here's the promised tarballs for Subversion
>> 1.6.7. The magic revision is r893529, and you can find the tarballs here:
>>
>> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.7
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 09:35:23AM -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> A little late, but never never, here's the promised tarballs for Subversion
> 1.6.7. The magic revision is r893529, and you can find the tarballs here:
>
> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.7/
>
> Please be sure to test the
Geoff Rowell wrote:
> Hi Devs,
>
> I've developed a proven Perl-based package for complex handling of
> Subversion hook events. It's XML configurable (uses libxml2) and
> supports Log::Log4perl logging. I've tested it under both Windows and
> Linux. My development focus has been flexibility and per
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 06:39:17PM +0100, Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 24 December 2009 17:00:00 Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>
>>> What problem do you really want to solve with this?
>>> Why is svnversion not good enough for your problem?
>>>
>>
Hi Devs,
I've developed a proven Perl-based package for complex handling of
Subversion hook events. It's XML configurable (uses libxml2) and
supports Log::Log4perl logging. I've tested it under both Windows and
Linux. My development focus has been flexibility and performance.
The OO code includes
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 09:35:23AM -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> A little late, but never never, here's the promised tarballs for Subversion
> 1.6.7. The magic revision is r893529, and you can find the tarballs here:
>
> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.7/
Not sure if we care, but hacki
Hi,
I'm looking for some benchmark test utility to test speed and
performance of the BDB and FSFS backends, but could not find anything.
Does anybody know about any utility or script suitable for this purpose?
Thanks to any advice.
--
Regards
Honza Horák
E-mail: horak.ho...@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 06:39:17PM +0100, Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> On Thursday 24 December 2009 17:00:00 Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > What problem do you really want to solve with this?
> > Why is svnversion not good enough for your problem?
>
> Since svnversion is a separate application, it h
9 matches
Mail list logo
