Tried this Installation Guide, and it worked until the point where you have to do the Database upgrade. But it seems like the database user from Plesk (create for phabricator with full permission, thats what plesk told) has no permission to create new Databases.

Also our documentation is way more hilarious.

(there should be no reason to create databases by hand)

We only support installation from our guide, other guides may be out of date or inaccurate in general.

@avivey followed an instruction from a plesk forum.
@chad not 100% sure if it counts as a shared host. I'm installing on a VPS with Root.

Are you installing Phabricator on a shared host?

In T9962#148505, @AleisterWeber wrote:

Added the Databases from ./bin/storage databases by hand in Plesk

Added the Databases from ./bin/storage databases by hand in Plesk

Downloaded via the git Repos. Added the Databases from ./bin/storage databases by hand in Plesk and perfomed the "./bin/storage upgrade --force".

Can't reproduce:

$ ./bin/storage --namespace t9962b upgrade --force
Loading quickstart template...
Applying patch 'phabricator:db.xhpast'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20150906.mailinglist.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20150930.drydock.log.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151001.drydock.rname.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151002.dashboard.status.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151002.harbormaster.bparam.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151009.drydock.auth.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151010.drydock.auth.2.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151013.drydock.op.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151023.harborpolicy.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151023.harborpolicy.2.php'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151023.patchduration.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151030.harbormaster.initiator.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151106.editengine.1.table.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151106.editengine.2.xactions.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151106.phame.post.mailkey.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151106.phame.post.mailkey.2.php'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151107.phame.blog.mailkey.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151107.phame.blog.mailkey.2.php'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151108.phame.blog.joinpolicy.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151108.xhpast.stderr.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151109.phame.post.comments.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151109.repository.coverage.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151109.xhpast.db.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151109.xhpast.db.2.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151110.daemonenvhash.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151111.phame.blog.archive.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151111.phame.blog.archive.2.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151112.herald.edge.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151116.owners.edge.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151128.phame.blog.picture.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151130.phurl.mailkey.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151130.phurl.mailkey.2.php'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151202.versioneddraft.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151207.editengine.1.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151210.land.1.refphid.sql'...
Applying patch 'phabricator:20151210.land.2.refphid.php'...
Storage is up to date. Use 'storage status' for details.
Verifying database schemata...

Side question, so I can submit a patch, is it a libphutil way to :

if (workflow_os == "Windows") {
  exec(window_feature);
} else {
  exec(unix_feature);
};

T8378 discusses a milder case of this sort of thing but I think the logic here applies to it as well.

This should be fixed at HEAD. Let us know if we missed anything or if you run into anything else. Thanks for the report!

Thanks for checking, that's quite helpful.

git branch --no-color and git branch --color=never both work, but Git 1.7.1 does not like git branch --no-column.

I don't know how exactly, but this error is related to T1116. Basically, adding this code fixes the described issue:

Ah. Yes, I agree.

I don't think that string is one of ours. Does it appear in flarc?

Hmm, actually... I think this is the fault of a custom extension I am using to upload files to S3.

• -c seems to come from 1.7.2.
• --no-color and --color=never are probably two acceptable alternative methods for writing -c color.ui=never.
• --no-column seems to be an acceptable alternative for writing -c column.ui=never, but may not have existed until 1.7.11.

@angie, I added you to Community so you should have sweeping powers on this install now.

@nipunn, can you please reset the object policy on this task so that we can move it to the correct column on the workboard?

So this is just T6802#93770?

User (or project) based policies produce useful error messages if you can't view an object:

We also now have Describing Root Problems as a guide to help people give us more details on issues they face. It's important for us to understand root issues so we can be sure we're correctly solving your problem.

I don't know what this ticket is about. If it's a bug report, please provide steps to reproduce per Contributing Bug Reports. If it's a feature request, please describe the core problem per Contributing Feature Requests.

Thanks @epriestley, much appreciated!

It is a sort of quick sort for the new devs of a school project thus it is hard to split and do less subsubtitle but it is not that bad to put a sentence beetwen h3 and h4.
Thus you can close as won't fix (I cannot any more).

In T9942#147948, @chad wrote:

h3 + h4 is intended as header, subheader.

That was pretty fast :).

@chad, that seems to be rPbf227f77a5dc928f1380e4bc81059f83cfb96548 2 weesks ago and you explicitly add those lines so I guess it was intended for something somewhere.
Thus I wan't send a patchfor fixing this, cause I'm pretty sure to break somethink elsewhere.

h3 + h4 is intended as header, subheader.

I think this is probably not something we're going to fix.

I can't seem to repro it either, might have been the issue with the edit route you fixed?

Ah, okay. I'm not sure what's going on there. I can't immediately reproduce that.

whoops, yes

Nothing happened (was added to the text area)

Let me clarify,

I couldn't include F1018337 in the original post?

I can't reproduce this issue by following the steps in the report:

I can't edit my own task... it 404's

1. In this case I was yes.
2. We have post-push builds hooked up, but not pre-push for this project in particular. (rely on arc unit)
3. We have tests only run on affected files, but we have certain files that can trigger a lot of tests.
4. I'm all for this (reducing some big categories from warning to advice by default). Going to try to make it happen. Would be cool to have a list of "top errors in this project" somewhere to make this process easier.

These unit tests take a while. I'll run it on the final revision

Ah yes, this should be a feature request and not a bug report. Sorry!