On 10/11/2012 02:52, Glen Barber wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 02:34:56AM +0200, Claude Buisson wrote:
FWIW, you can compile the svn binary elsewhere, statically linked, and
save the dependency problem by copying the resulting binary around.
Lucky people who have an "elsewhere".
And the static binary is as much bloated than the dynamic ones.
Compare it with this poor csup, which gave great services for a small price.
Agreed on all counts.
For what it is worth, my response was really geared with the mindset of
having a cluster of machines to administer, where having the extra
(sometimes unnecessary) dependencies of svn are not ideal and/or can
conflict with other software.
I understood that. At a time I have been in that situation, but to be there I
had to "sell" the use of FreeBSD at my $WORK, and started with a single machine
and limited ressources. So the existence of a cluster even for people doing real
production work with FreeBSD is not a given.
As mentioned in today's earlier announcement for 9.1-RC2, however, CVS
backporting from SVN will continue to be done for the stable/9 branch.
> Hopefully that buys some time for svnup to become reality.
>
One of the starting point of this thread have been that according to cvsweb,
there does not seem to have been any update of releng7, releng8, and releng9 at
least since October 5 or 6, which is confirmed by cvsup1.fr.freebsd.org (I have
just done the test for releng8).
So something is not working somewhere, and someone may ask "do somebody care
about it ?"
The problem with svnsup is that it had to be a prerequisite, and had not be.
Glen
Sorry to have started so long a thread. I asked essentially the same questions
about cvs/csup/mirrors, etc more than a year ago without real answer..
Claude Buisson
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
