Subject: Re: CVSup collections for a NetBSD CVS tree
To: NetBSD-current Discussion List <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: David Maxwell <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/28/1999 22:41:11
On Wed, Apr 28, 1999 at 03:50:37PM -0400, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> [ On Monday, April 26, 1999 at 16:41:01 (-0700), Jonathan Stone wrote: ]
> > CVSup is not really a *solution* for *Net*BSD, until it runs on all
> > NetBSD platforms. ``Why is this so hard to grasp''?
> It's trivial to set up a CVSup *server* on NetBSD, provided the server
> platform is chosen with CVSup in mind (which seems easy enough to do!).
Not the point. I'd have to agree with other people's comments that
NetBSD should not encourage use of something which is largely non-ported.
> Modula-3, and thus CVSup, working on *more* (or maybe even all!) NetBSD
This is NetBSD. Not Net-Modula3, or Net-CVSup.
If we need a good (and portable) tool, we should consider creating one
that matches other goals of NetBSD.
> BTW, before anyone goes wandering off to re-implement CVSup in something
> other than Modula-3, be well aware that much of it's efficiency seems to
> come from the fact that it's a multi-threaded application. It does seem
> to require a fair bit of CPU, even just on the client side.
What are the main gains of CVSup? Multi-threaded, sends diffs only,
anything else? People have only commented that it's faster.
David Maxwell, email@example.comfirstname.lastname@example.org --> Mastery of UNIX, like
mastery of language, offers real freedom. The price of freedom is always dear,
but there's no substitute. Personally, I'd rather pay for my freedom than live
in a bitmapped, pop-up-happy dungeon like NT. - Thomas Scoville