Subject: AnonCVS vs Sup2CVS
To: None <email@example.com>
From: David Forbes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/16/1999 11:43:27
Note: This e-mail does not mention CVSup deliberately. At the moment,
I'm not interested in that.
Summary: I'm looking for a better way of fetching the NetBSD sources than
putting the tarballs on a ZIP disk. For various reasons, both AnonCVS and
Sup2CVS are slightly suboptimal for my purposes, and I'd like to check
that I've understood the pros and cons correctly.
Here's the situation. I have a couple of NetBSD machines behind a 56k
modem. I'd like to keep up to speed with -current more often, on at least
one of my machines. Other than compiling kernels, I also like to hack
bits and fiddle now and again. Disk space is not a limiting factor at the
So I could use the AnonCVS system. Advantages are, as I see it, that it
sends down only the diffs for each file. Disadvantages are that to, for
example, create a patch I have to connect up, as there's no local
repository. Or for instance, if I wanted to whip out another clean copy
of the tree to start some other work on, or to apply someone else's patch
for something without interfering with my projects.
Which brings me to the Sup2CVS script thing. Seems like a good idea,
having a complete local repository that I can just pull a version out of
at any point. But do I end up with different file version numbers from
the rest of the NetBSD world? Are there any other disadvantages? (I
already have n copies of the source tree anyway, so that's not a problem.)
Is there anyone still using the combination of sup & CVS regularly or have
most people gone over to anonCVS?