[ On Sunday, February 10, 2002 at 19:39:06 (+0000), Peter Fairbrother wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Snapshot source?
>
> Would it be a good idea to tarball the snapshot sources? It would take up a
> bit of server space, but it would allow people who need a functionality only
> available in -current to recompile kernels etc. without long and complex cvs
> updating. Making the tarball wouldn't take long if done at the same time as
> the snapshot.
> 
> Snapshots seem generally to be more reliable than a -current taken at
> random. In fact I can't really see the point of snapshots without their
> source being available at least to developers (but maybe they want people to
> test a specific snapshot/kernel).

Hmmmm....  if the snapshot sources included CVS subdirectories then they
might be of some benefit -- that way many potential CVS-related problems
could usually be identified (eg. uncommitted changes included in the
snapshot), and of course anyone making changes to the snapshot sources
would be better able to identify their local changes (i.e. generate
reliable diffs).

> Maybe I should move to the city! I can't even put up a satellite dish
> outside. Would one work in the attic?

It proabably depends on what your roof is made of....  :-)

-- 
								Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;  <gwoods@acm.org>;  <g.a.woods@ieee.org>;  <woods@robohack.ca>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>