Subject: [firstname.lastname@example.org: Re: Running -current.]
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Richard Rauch <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/20/2003 19:26:30
(Sorry if this is a duplicate for you, Valeriy; I did a "r" reply in
mutt, being used to how PINE handles it. I meant to change your name
to current-users since you presumably subscribe, but by the time I got
done editing, I forgot. Mea culpa. Eventually my fingers will develop
mutt reflexes and forget PINE.)
On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 03:59:39AM +0400, Valeriy E. Ushakov wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 16:43:58 -0500, Richard Rauch wrote:
> > * The laptop is a 233MHz plain Pentium; no speed demon by present
> > standards. Should I consider building -current daily?
> Ny 233MHz Dell (running -current) takes about 8 hours to build the
> world, so it's definitely not something you want to do daily. I
> usually rebuild once a month or so, unless I need some particular
> userland fix/feature, in which case I just build a relevant subset of
> the tree.
I have an "always on" connection; I can probably arrange to do this
while I sleep or the like. (Or, maybe, do the build on another
machine? How is cross-building from 1.6? Or is that not (yet?)
[ ADDENDUM: Also, I see another reply re. "update" builds.
Hm. Maybe I should *subscribe* to this list if I'm going to do
scheduled, daily builds. (^& ]
> > I understand that the build may break---though if need be I can
> > roll back to 1.6[.1] or a snapshot or the like.
> Build to DESTDIR. If the build breaks - you system is not affected in
I didn't write what I meant. Sorry. I'm more concerned that if it
builds, but the resulting system blows up in some spectacular manner.
Of course, all important data would be backed up, but I'd like to
be back on my feet quickly if this kind of thing happens more than,
say, once or twice a year. (My IMPRESSION is that this kind of thing
almost never happens. But without having experience with -current,
I want to hear some first-hand thoughts.)
> > What's the best way to keep a local hack (yes, my change *IS* a
> > hack, but it makes the driver work for me) in?
> Track the tree using cvs(1) from the anoncvs server. Your local
> change will be kept merged automatically when the file is changed
I should have known that. (^& Thanks.
I guess without a write access [to a branch], I either have to make
a list of directories that I touch, or I have to backup everything.
I was hoping for some way to backup my changes and just my changes.
(A local CVS mirror would do that, but the mirror itself would need
a copy of the full source tree, so I wouldn't be saving anything.)
> > * A little related to part of the above: The reason that I want to run
> > -current is to do some belated work on window(1). The hoops to make
> See my previous comment about cvs(1) vs. local changes. Since nobody
> touches window(1) that often, the chance of a cvs conflict is very
> low, I'd say.
Yeah. I was just suffering a brain-glitch about CVS. (I've used CVS
before. I really *should*not* have had to ask that question. Ah
well, I can only plead that I'm getting old and my mind is like a
"I probably don't know what I'm talking about." http://www.olib.org/~rkr/