I have a problem when I'm pushing my code and files to the remote server.
It says that the changes (after they were commited) were pushed successfully onto the remote server but the changes are not visible on the server.
Since I don't have access to the server, how would I go about debugging this problem to find out where the problem occurred (the logs on the server don't show anything I am told)?
Maybe important note:
I had to force push the changes because it wouldn't sent them otherwise.
Second question:
How can I re-push my changes?
If
$ hg outgoing
shows nothing, then the changes are already there on the server — I promise! If you had access to the server, then running
$ hg log
would reveal that the changesets are really there. The confusion must be that the working copy on the server is not updated when you push changes to it. So someone needs to run
$ hg update
on the repository on the server to actually make the working copy update. Normally, you don't need a working copy on the server, but if you're using Mercurial to publish, say, a website, then you'll want a push to also update the working copy.
The solution is to add
[hooks]
changegroup = hg update
to the .hg/hgrc file on the server. Maybe you can ask some admin to install that hook for you?
Related
I created a mercurial repository on some file servers net share.
Is it possible to automatically get the remote repository updated to tip if somebody pushes its changes?
Because some other people (purely users) may copy the repositories content (rather than cloning, because of lack of .hg) and i want them to get the newest version.
Since it is a share on a simple NAS it would be good if the pushing client could invoke this update.
It seems that a hook on the changegroup event can solve this.
Add the following lines to the repository's configuration file (repo/.hg/hgrc)
[hooks]
changegroup = hg update
This solution was suggested on a slightly different question:
Cloning mercurial repo to the remote host
At least under windows this seems only to work on local repositories. The reason for this is, that hg tries run a cmd on the remote path that fails, since it does not support UNC paths as current direcory.
Adding explicitly the repository url fixes this, but its not client independent anymore.
[hooks]
changegroup = hg update -R %HG_URL%
You could treat the server repository as your "local working directory" and then PULL from your own PC to that location. If you use hg pull --update then it will automatically update the working folder to the latest.
One way to do this is to login to your NAS and physically run the hg command line program there. If not, you could also mount the NAS folder on your local PC and then chdir to its mapped local folder and use your local hg client to do so.
This might seem like an odd thing to do but Mercurial doesn't care which is the "clone" and which is the "server", you can swap them interchangeably in your workflow.
I would like to have a central repository in a directory on my local computer without setting up a server.
Context: I am working with my boss on a local server inside our LAN. We both are using a vnc connection onto the server, and are doing our work there for simplicity reasons. I would like to set it up so that I can have a copy of my scripts for development, and then when I get to a release, I will push it to a different directory that my boss can then run them from (or even better pull from to his own set and run from there).
I read that you can create a hg server by running 'hg serve', but I do not want to open it up to the LAN, because I don't want it to be accessible.
I tried running 'hg push /home/source' and it gave me an error.
I then ran 'hg init' while in that directory and tried again. It looked like it worked, and then didn't show any files in the directory. I ran status and it showed nothing, and then ran log and it showed the commits.
... without setting up a server
One way I've used to share a "central" Mercurial repository without having to deal with any "server" issues is to have the "central" repository in a folder on Dropbox.
For example, suppose:
your repository is named "repo" and that your "private" copy is in ~/repo
your Dropbox directory on your computer is ~/Dropbox/
Then:
cd ~/Dropbox
hg clone ~/repo
Now suppose you make some changes in ~/repo. You can then "push" them from ~/repo to ~/Dropbox/repo, or (more easily, as explained below) "pull" them into ~/Dropbox/repo when you're ready.
To make updating the "central" repository convenient, you might like to create a script such as:
#!/bin/bash
cd ~/Dropbox/repo
hg tip
hg pull -u
hg tip
Notice that in the script, there is no need to specify the source from which to pull; the hgrc file that's created when you created the clone keeps track of that. (Thank you, hg.)
If your colleague has direct access to a folder on your computer, then you could still adopt the strategy described above, without using Dropbox.
Needless to say, there are many variations.
Needless to say also, if more than one person attempts to commit changes to the shared folder, chaos can easily ensue.
I need to control the version of a few files accessible via an SMB share. These files will be modified by several people. The files themselves are directly used by a web server.
Since these are production files I wanted to force the users to pull a local copy, edit them, commit and push them back. Unfortunately there is no Mercurial server on that machine.
What would be the appropriate way to configure Mercurial on my side so that:
the versioning (.hg directory) is kept on the share
and that the files on the share are at the latest version?
I do not have access to this server (other than via the share). If I could have a mercurial server on that machine I would have used a hook to update the files in the production directory (I am saying this just to highlight what I want to achieve - this approach is not possible as I do not control that server)
Thanks!
UPDATE: I ended up using an intermediate server (which I have control over). A hook on changegroup triggers a script which i) hg update to have fresh local files ii) copies them to the SMB share
EDIT 1 Following discussions in comments with alex I have looked at the verbose version of the command line output. The \\srv\hg\test1 repo has a [hooks] section with changegroup = hg update. The output from a hg push -v gives some insights:
pushing to \\srv\hg\test1
query 1; heads
(...)
updating the branch cache
running hook changegroup: hg update
'\\srv\hg\test1'
CMD.EXE was started with the above path as the current directory.
UNC paths are not supported. Defaulting to Windows directory.
abort: no repository found in 'C:\Windows' (.hg not found)!
warning: changegroup hook exited with status 255
checking for updated bookmarks
listing keys for "bookmarks"
If I understand correctly the output above:
a cmd.exe was triggered on the client, even though the [hook] was on the receiving server
it tried to update the remote repo
... but failed because UNC are not supported
So alex's answer was correct - it just does not work (yet?) on MS Windows. (Alex please correct me in the comments if I am wrong)
If I understood correctly, you are looking for two things:
A repository hook that will automatically update the production repo to the latest version whenever someone pushes to it. This is simple: You're looking for the answer to this question.
If you can rely on your co-workers to always go through the pull-commit-push process, you're done. If that's not the case, you need a way to prevent people from modifying the production files in place and never committing them.
Unfortunately, I don't think you can selectively withhold write permissions to the checked-out files (but not to the repo) on an SMB share. But you could discourage direct modification by making the location of the files less obvious. Perhaps you could direct people to a second repository, configured so that everything pushed to it is immediately pushed on to the production repository. This repo need not have a checked-out version of the files at all (create it with hg clone -U, or do an hg update -r 0 afterwards), eliminating the temptation to bypass mercurial.
What prevents you from mount your Samba share and run hg init there? You don't need mercurial server (hg serve or more sophisticated things) to perform push/pull operations.
I use Mercurial on desktops, and then push local repositories to a centralized server. I noticed that this remote server does not hold local copies of files in its repositories (the directory is empty, except obviously for the .hg one).
What is the preferred way to populate these directories with local copies? (which in turn are used by various unrelated services on that server).
What I came up so far is to use a hook and hg archive to create a local copy. This would be a satisfactory solution but I need to configure a per-repository hgrc file (which is tedious but I did not find a way to centralize this in /etc/mercurial/hgrc). Maybe a global script (in /etc/mercurial/hgrc, run for each changegroup event)? (in that case how can I get the repository name to use in a if...then scenario?)
If you can get access to the remote repository, you could install a hook for when changegroups come in, and perform an hg update when that happens.
A quick check shows this in the FAQ (question 4.21), but to summarize/duplicate: edit the .hg/hgrc file on the remote repository, and add the following lines:
[hooks]
changegroup = hg update
Whenever the remote repository gets pushed to (or when it performs a pull), it will update to the latest changeset.
Some caveats - this may fail if any changes have been made to the files on the remote side (you could use hg update -C instead). Also, if you have pushed any anonymous branches (which you would have to consciously force), you may not update to what you want to update to.
I have a small group of developers and we all develop on our own machines. When we have code that is ready for testing, we merge and push to a RhodeCode installation. The hgrc file for my central RhodeCode repo is set up like this:
[paths]
test_env = /www/mysite/test
prod_env = /www/mysite/prod
[hooks]
changegroup = hg push test_env
so when a person checks code into RhodeCode, the changes are automatically pushed to the test environment. (There's a hg update in the test repo hgrc file, so the code updates there). This is perfect.
BUT.. I would like our RhodeCode admins to be able to push to prod without needing shell access on the server. Is there a way to allow someone to run a "hg push prod_env" from the RhodeCode interface? I figure since RhodeCode has full control over hg, it should be possible, but does this ability exists somewhere in RhodeCode? would it be a huge task to add it?
If not, how would you go about allowing an authenticated user to push a repository to production without shell access? I have been googling, but I can't seem to find anything. I know I could write a php script with a passthru("hg push test_env), but that seems like a permissions nightmare as apache runs as "nobody" and rhodecode owns the repo.
Thoughts?
Obviously, you cannot push nothing. But you can try to add or edit some file from the RhodeCode interface (which allows this to do) at the prod_env. This should cause local commit and push without accessing a shell.
For those looking at this question, here's how I solved it:
Wrote a passworded page in PHP with a button that executes this code:
shell_exec('hg pull -R ../wp-content/themes/2014');
I then put hg update in the hgrc file for the prod website, and made the web user and authorized user of the repository.
It works pretty good - i have slight security concerns because of the resulting file ownership, but assuming the PHP follows proper practice, there aren't any problems.