I have a mercurial repository, which I need to be splitted into parts. I've convert'ed it to mercurial, everything is great, but the new repository has no bookmarks from old one.
How can this be fixed, please?
hg stores your bookmarks in two files in the .hg folder, namely bookmarks and bookmarks.current.
Since the bookmarks are referenced with the changeset id hash (which stays the same between repos) simply copying the two files to the .hg folder in the newly convert-ed repo should set them up properly.
Related
I have a shell repository OriginalWithSubrepo with a subrepository Sub containing a bunch of actual files.
When I clone OriginalWithSubrepo like this
hg clone --pull --noupdate "C:\TestRepo\OriginalWithSubrepo" "C:\TestRepo\OriginalWithSubrepo-clone"
The clone thus created contains just a few mercurial housekeeping files, there is no actual data from the original Sub\.hg directory. I don't know what those files mean but apparently they are enough to recreate the repo because when I update the working directory in clone, the whole thing gets filled out with all the files, including inside the Sub\.hg directory. However, if I clone, then rename the original, and then attempt to update the clone, it doesn't work saying the OriginalWithSubrepo is not found, which means it's all based on links to the original.
This problem doesn't arise when I run clone with update, or when I clone a repository without subrepos.
It behaves the same when I clone to a network share, which is where I really want it to work.
So how do I make a fully independent clone of a repo with subrepos (w/o a simultaneous update)?
Windows XP, hg version 3.4.1
When you add the first subrepo to the parent repo, .hgsub is added to the parent repo. The subrepo only becomes a subrepo from the changeset that commits .hgsub.
When you do hg clone --noupdate --pull parent parent-clone, parent-clone is not at any changeset yet, and so not yet at a changeset at which the subrepo has been created
So how do I make a fully independent clone of a repo with subrepos (w/o a simultaneous update)?
I don't think you can do this as such.
But this may achieve what you're trying to do (I'm reading between the lines here, but I'm guessing to have the repo on the share, but without any files visible):
Create repos on your network share for your parent and sub \\fileserver\repos\OriginalWithSub\ and \\fileserver\repos\Sub\
Modify your local OriginalWithSub .hgsub set the remote path to be \\fileserver\repos\Sub\ and commit.
push your local repositories to their respective network share equivalents.
Both repositories now exist on the network share, without any files visible apart from inside .hg, and you can clone \\fileserver\repos\OriginalWithSub\ (with update) from another computer and get the full history of both OriginalWithSub and Sub.
I have file/directory structure:
main/.hg
main/subrepo/.hg
main/subrepo1/.hg
I have .hgignore file with such content
.hg
Finally, I want to make a commit in 'main' repository that will include all files in it, including all files from main/subrepo and main/subrepo1 and excluding folders main/subrepo/.hg and main/subrepo1/.hg (so all files from main folder, excluding .hg folders in it will be commited). But Mercurial skips main/subrepo/* and main/subrepo1/*. It does not include this subfolders/subrepos to commit fully. How can I fix this?
I'm going to guess that you have simply created some nested repositories, but not properly linked them as subrepositories.
Make sure that the root of the main repository has a file called .hgsub. You create the file, add the following and then add + commit the file to the main repository:
subrepo = https://path-to-subrepo/
subrepo1 = https://path-to-subrepo1
If the subrepos do not point to some remote server, you would use the local path of course.
I have a repository with a number of sub repos, and I wish to clone all of them without having working files. When ever I try to clone using --noupdate no of the sub repositories are available in the closed repository. Is this due to the lack of a .hgsub file in the cloned repository?
That is sort of the reason why.
More specifically, subrepos are implemented not as their own repos, but as part of the working copy their parent repos ( conceptually, you can think of a subrepo as being just a single file existing in your main repo ). However as soon as you update, the repo and subrepos will be at the same state as if you had cloned without using -noupdate.
I currently have a project versioned using Mercurial. On my computer, there is a .hg folder in the root of my local repository.
I want to change from Mercurial to Git, so I'm wondering if removing the .hg folder is enough to remove Mercurial versioning from this folder?
If not, what can I do? (I don't want to move the existing sources on my computer).
Yes, all the bits that make it a Mercurial repository are in the .hg folder so you can delete that to remove the Mercurial versioning.
Note though that doing this will obviously lose all your source control history as well.
Looks like there are some options to convert the repository if you want to keep that history, first hit on google:
http://arr.gr/blog/2011/10/bitbucket-converting-hg-repositories-to-git/
yes that should work.
mercurial stores chancesets and so on in the .hg folder, but you will lose all your projects history if you just delete the .hg folder and use git instead then.
I'm starting with Mercurial. I'm reading the mercurial book but still have a question.
I've started my project month ago, and i have a lot of files and directories in it. Now, i want to use Mercurial and made myself an account in bitbucket. Now, i want to set this project up in Bitbucket. How can i add all those files to the bitbucket repo?
This is what i was thinking i could do:
I could try to (1) clone the empty repo (from bitbucket) (1) copy all files into that directory, (3) issue an "hg add" and after that (4) commiting.
Maybe you have a better way to do this.
Thanks!
(1)
hg clone https://ME#bitbucket.org/ME/myproject
(2)
cp existing-project/* myproject/
cd myproject
(3)
hg add
(4)
hg commit -u ME
(5)
hg push (i think i have to do this to make the changes visible)
You can simply hg init, hg add, and hg commit in the original project folder, then edit ~/project/.hg/hgrc to add a default-push location of your bitbucket repo (you can clone it to a temporary folder to get the hgrc created for you which you can copy into your project, even, without needing to RTFM for the right syntax.)
Because of the distributed nature of mercurial, this hgrc entry is the only thing relating your local repo to bitbucket at all; you can even hg push https://ME#bitbucket.org/ME/myproject without making the link explicit anywhere. Each copy of a repository is completely self-sufficient.
Wooble's answer is ok, but it's missing something, so I'm supplementing here.
When you first create an empty repository (by hg init or creating on bitbucket), it has no identity. However, as soon as it has any changesets, it has an identity and you can only push/pull between it and repositories that share that identity.
If you had 2 repositories A and B for separate projects, you wouldn't be able push/pull between them. Once you create a new repository on bitbucket you can push changesets from either A or B to that repo once. If you push changes from B that first time, the bitbucket repository is now related to B. You can't then push changesets from A into it, or pull changesets into A from it.
So when Wooble says,
...this hgrc entry is the only thing relating your local repo to bitbucket at all;
That is correct while it is still empty as it is not related to any repositories until it has changesets. And you still need that address to be able to push/pull between your local repo and the bitbucket repo, but once you've pushed changesets to it it also has that identity that relates it to your local repo.