Re: RCS and $FreeBSD$ purge

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024, 7:32 PM Steve Kargl wrote: > I'm currently syncing src/lib/msun with my private libm > repository where I do much of my hacking on libm issues. > In looking at diffs, I see a few lingering RCS and > $FreeBSD$ tags. For example, lib/msun/amd64/s_scalbnl.S > contains > > /* R

Re: RCS and $FreeBSD$ purge

Hi Steve, On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 06:32:26PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: > I'm currently syncing src/lib/msun with my private libm > repository where I do much of my hacking on libm issues. > In looking at diffs, I see a few lingering RCS and > $FreeBSD$ tags. For example, lib/msun/amd64/s_scalbnl

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

On Oct 21, 2013, at 6:32 AM, Kris Moore wrote: > On 10/20/2013 20:58, Julian Elischer wrote: >> Kris. exactly what features need to be added to the boot process to >> allow >> what you want to do, but without using grub? >> > > Here's a list of the features we are using from grub: > > For ins

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

On 10/20/2013 20:58, Julian Elischer wrote: > Kris. exactly what features need to be added to the boot process to > allow > what you want to do, but without using grub? > Here's a list of the features we are using from grub: For install medium: * Hybrid DVD ISO/USB image in same file * BIOS / U

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

Kris. exactly what features need to be added to the boot process to allow what you want to do, but without using grub? On 10/19/13 3:39 AM, Teske, Devin wrote: On Oct 10, 2013, at 9:42 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: On 10/11/13 12:39 AM, Teske, Devin wrote: On Oct 10, 2013, at 9:06 AM, Julian El

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

On Oct 10, 2013, at 9:42 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 10/11/13 12:39 AM, Teske, Devin wrote: >> On Oct 10, 2013, at 9:06 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: >> >>> On 10/10/13 1:05 AM, Teske, Devin wrote: I'm late to the party again ;D (didn't realize the rcs thread had turned BE) >>>

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

from Juergen Lock: > If you mean it loads the kernel but then crashes instead of booting it > then your grub2 version is missing this fix: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=699002 > >I used Super Grub2 Disk image on the System Rescue CD written to USB sti

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

In article <59.81.16944.C6136525@cdptpa-oedge02> you write: >Sorry for previous typo in From: line, missing right angle bracket at end. >Then, in a finger error, I resent that message just before finding the error >and making the needed correction. > >from Devin Teske: > >> I'm late to the party a

Re: rcs

On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Glen Barber wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:49:15PM -0400, Outback Dingo wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Jakub Lach > wrote: > > > > > I have similar views. There is abundance of be-everything-for-everybody > > > Linuxes > > > and not enough lean

Re: rcs

On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:49:15PM -0400, Outback Dingo wrote: > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Jakub Lach wrote: > > > I have similar views. There is abundance of be-everything-for-everybody > > Linuxes > > and not enough lean and mean Unix-style kits... > > > > > > > > > however did we neglec

Re: rcs

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Jakub Lach wrote: > I have similar views. There is abundance of be-everything-for-everybody > Linuxes > and not enough lean and mean Unix-style kits... > > > > however did we neglect to realize that even some ports need rcs => clog-1.6.tar.gz doesn't seem to exi

Re: rcs

I have similar views. There is abundance of be-everything-for-everybody Linuxes and not enough lean and mean Unix-style kits... -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/rcs-tp5850096p5850951.html Sent from the freebsd-current mailing list archive at Nabble.com. __

Re: rcs

On Oct 10, 2013 2:20 PM, "Igor Mozolevsky" wrote: > > > > > On 10 October 2013 21:18, Jos Backus wrote: >> >> >> On Oct 10, 2013 1:07 PM, "Igor Mozolevsky" wrote: >> > > > [snip] >> >> > You're missing the point- the requirement is "provide a way to keep track of changes for file X" not "have ma

Re: rcs

On 10 October 2013 21:18, Jos Backus wrote: > > On Oct 10, 2013 1:07 PM, "Igor Mozolevsky" wrote: > > > [snip] > > You're missing the point- the requirement is "provide a way to keep > track of changes for file X" not "have many fancy and unnecessary > features"... > > That may have been the re

Re: rcs

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 01:35:33PM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > On 2013-10-10, at 1:06 PM, Igor Mozolevsky wrote: > > > You're missing the point- the requirement is "provide a way to keep track > > of changes for file X" not "have many fancy and unnecessary features"... > > The point is t

Re: rcs

On 2013-10-10, at 1:06 PM, Igor Mozolevsky wrote: > You're missing the point- the requirement is "provide a way to keep track > of changes for file X" not "have many fancy and unnecessary features"... The point is to put back the specific RCS commands that were recently removed. Those of us us

Re: rcs

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Diane Bruce wrote: > ... > > OK, but please, can we replace RCS with Fossil in 11 then? That > adds a > > real > > improvement to FreeBSD while giving people plenty of time to > prepare. > > Fossil was showing promise the last time I tried it. Quite fran

Re: rcs

On Oct 10, 2013 1:07 PM, "Igor Mozolevsky" wrote: > > > > > On 10 October 2013 20:36, Jos Backus wrote: >> >> >> On Oct 10, 2013 11:54 AM, "Igor Mozolevsky" wrote: >> > >> > On 10 October 2013 19:15, Jos Backus wrote: >> >> >> >> On Oct 10, 2013 9:38 AM, "Julian Elischer" wrote: >> > >> > >> >

Re: rcs

On 10 October 2013 20:36, Jos Backus wrote: > > On Oct 10, 2013 11:54 AM, "Igor Mozolevsky" wrote: > > > > On 10 October 2013 19:15, Jos Backus wrote: > >> > >> On Oct 10, 2013 9:38 AM, "Julian Elischer" wrote: > > > > > > [snip] > > > >> > >> > well since people expect RCS.. it is not a no br

Re: rcs

On Oct 10, 2013 11:54 AM, "Igor Mozolevsky" wrote: > > > > > On 10 October 2013 19:15, Jos Backus wrote: >> >> On Oct 10, 2013 9:38 AM, "Julian Elischer" wrote: > > > [snip] > >> >> > well since people expect RCS.. it is not a no brainer. >> > you are asking people to learn a whole new tool fo

Re: rcs

On 10 October 2013 19:15, Jos Backus wrote: > On Oct 10, 2013 9:38 AM, "Julian Elischer" wrote: > [snip] > > well since people expect RCS.. it is not a no brainer. > > you are asking people to learn a whole new tool for functionality that > is currently very simple.. > > edit file > > ci -

Re: rcs

... > OK, but please, can we replace RCS with Fossil in 11 then? That adds a > real > improvement to FreeBSD while giving people plenty of time to prepare. Fossil was showing promise the last time I tried it. Quite frankly > > well since people expect RCS.. it is not a no brainer. > > y

Re: rcs

On Oct 10, 2013 9:38 AM, "Julian Elischer" wrote: > > On 10/11/13 12:34 AM, Jos Backus wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: >>> >>> On 10/9/13 11:59 PM, Jos Backus wrote: >> >> [snip] OK, but please, can we replace RCS with Fossil in 11 then? That adds a

Re: rcs

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 10/9/13 11:59 PM, Jos Backus wrote: [snip] > OK, but please, can we replace RCS with Fossil in 11 then? That adds a real >> improvement to FreeBSD while giving people plenty of time to prepare. >> > can fossil read rcs files? and how

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

On 10/11/13 12:39 AM, Teske, Devin wrote: On Oct 10, 2013, at 9:06 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: On 10/10/13 1:05 AM, Teske, Devin wrote: I'm late to the party again ;D (didn't realize the rcs thread had turned BE) Both problems can be solved. The loading of the kernel *after* choosing your boot

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

On Oct 10, 2013, at 9:06 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 10/10/13 1:05 AM, Teske, Devin wrote: >> >> I'm late to the party again ;D (didn't realize the rcs thread had turned BE) >> >> Both problems can be solved. >> The loading of the kernel *after* choosing your boot device is trivial. >> We'v

Re: rcs

On 10/11/13 12:34 AM, Jos Backus wrote: On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Julian Elischer > wrote: On 10/9/13 11:59 PM, Jos Backus wrote: [snip] OK, but please, can we replace RCS with Fossil in 11 then? That adds a real improvement to Free

Re: rcs

On 10/9/13 11:59 PM, Jos Backus wrote: On Oct 9, 2013 5:39 AM, "Kimmo Paasiala" wrote: On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:03 PM, George Mitchell wrote: On 10/09/13 03:20, Hans Ottevanger wrote: On 10/08/13 04:31, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in t

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

On 10/10/13 1:05 AM, Teske, Devin wrote: I'm late to the party again ;D (didn't realize the rcs thread had turned BE) Both problems can be solved. The loading of the kernel *after* choosing your boot device is trivial. We've been doing it at $work for *years* (almost a decade?) I can put that

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

On 10/10/2013 00:47, Thomas Mueller wrote: > Sorry for previous typo in From: line, missing right angle bracket at end. > Then, in a finger error, I resent that message just before finding the error > and making the needed correction. > > from Devin Teske: > >> I'm late to the party again ;D (didn

Re: rcs

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? > > The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and make their > technical case. > Still using RCS here and there, esp. managing /etc. Having to install it

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

Sorry for previous typo in From: line, missing right angle bracket at end. Then, in a finger error, I resent that message just before finding the error and making the needed correction. from Devin Teske: > I'm late to the party again ;D (didn't realize the rcs thread had turned BE) > Both probl

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

from Devin Teske: > I'm late to the party again ;D (didn't realize the rcs thread had turned BE) > Both problems can be solved. > The loading of the kernel *after* choosing your boot device is trivial. > We've been doing it at $work for *years* (almost a decade?) > I can put that in, whenever. P

Re: BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

from Devin Teske: > I'm late to the party again ;D (didn't realize the rcs thread had turned BE) > Both problems can be solved. > The loading of the kernel *after* choosing your boot device is trivial. > We've been doing it at $work for *years* (almost a decade?) > I can put that in, whenever. P

Re: rcs

from Devin Teske: > That wasn't the rationale. sysinstall was broken and more people wanted a > replacement than wanted to see it fixed. > bsdinstall is simply coming of age still (sysinstall had a 15 year run). Some things I disliked about sysinstall were choosing a type of install from a conf

Re: rcs

On Oct 9, 2013, at 2:48 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 9 October 2013 11:28, Bruce Cran wrote: > >> On 10/9/2013 3:17 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> >>> Only a few years ago you could take a dvd or memstick of FreeBSD and have >>> 1000s of packages to choose from during your install. That is br

Re: rcs

On 9 October 2013 11:28, Bruce Cran wrote: > On 10/9/2013 3:17 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > >> Only a few years ago you could take a dvd or memstick of FreeBSD and have >> 1000s of packages to choose from during your install. That is broken now? >> > > At some point it was decided that the inst

Re: rcs

On 10/9/2013 3:17 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: Only a few years ago you could take a dvd or memstick of FreeBSD and have 1000s of packages to choose from during your install. That is broken now? At some point it was decided that the installer should be as simple as possible and package instal

BE Loader Menu (was Re: rcs)

On Oct 9, 2013, at 9:42 AM, Kris Moore wrote: > On 10/09/2013 12:33, Allan Jude wrote: >> On 2013-10-09 12:23, Freddie Cash wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 10/9/13 2:35 AM, Freddie Cash

Re: rcs

On 10/09/2013 12:33, Allan Jude wrote: > On 2013-10-09 12:23, Freddie Cash wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: >>> On 10/9/13 2:35 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Alfred

Re: rcs

On 10/09/13 15:47, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 10/9/13 3:20 PM, Hans Ottevanger wrote: >> On 10/08/13 04:31, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >>> Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? >>> >>> The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and make their >>> technical

Re: rcs

On 2013-10-09 12:23, Freddie Cash wrote: > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: >> >>> On 10/9/13 2:35 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: You're right on the

Re: rcs

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: > >> On 10/9/13 2:35 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >>> >>> You're right on the money, to be honest this is one of the reasons why

Re: rcs

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 10/9/13 2:35 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> >> You're right on the money, to be honest this is one of the reasons why >>> I've switched to using OSX as my desktop OS. >>> >>> zsh

Re: rcs

On Oct 9, 2013 5:39 AM, "Kimmo Paasiala" wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:03 PM, George Mitchell wrote: > > On 10/09/13 03:20, Hans Ottevanger wrote: > >> > >> On 10/08/13 04:31, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > >>> > >>> Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? > >>> >

Re: rcs

On 10/9/13 7:20 AM, Glen Barber wrote: On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 07:17:11AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: Only a few years ago you could take a dvd or memstick of FreeBSD and have 1000s of packages to choose from during your install. That is broken now? memstick.img always had a minimal set of

Re: rcs

Going off on a slight tangent... On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: For this to work in a disconnected environment, you need a ports tree with a fully populated distfiles/ directory. The hack we came up with was to put a FreeBSD host on the external network, on which we ran a scri

Re: rcs

On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 07:17:11AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Only a few years ago you could take a dvd or memstick of FreeBSD and > have 1000s of packages to choose from during your install. That is > broken now? > memstick.img always had a minimal set of packages (mostly documentation se

Re: rcs

On 10/9/13 1:59 AM, Daniel Nebdal wrote: On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: Hello, Daniel. You wrote 8 октября 2013 г., 19:40:23: DN> If they get the package repositories back up - which I assume will DN> happen before any official releases from 10 - it should just be "pkg

Re: rcs

On 10/9/13 3:20 PM, Hans Ottevanger wrote: On 10/08/13 04:31, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and make their technical case. Technically it is quite simple: I need RCS to sta

Re: rcs

On 10/9/13 4:59 PM, Daniel Nebdal wrote: On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: Hello, Daniel. You wrote 8 октября 2013 г., 19:40:23: DN> If they get the package repositories back up - which I assume will DN> happen before any official releases from 10 - it should just be "pkg

Re: rcs

On 10/9/13 2:35 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: You're right on the money, to be honest this is one of the reasons why I've switched to using OSX as my desktop OS. zsh, vim, screen by default. and upgrades work. At the end of the day I'm spend

Re: rcs

On 10/9/13 4:38 AM, Graham Todd wrote: On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Adrian Chadd wrote: I think that's great. But, as we are increasingly finding, theres no stable ports snapshot, so unless we as a project change how packages are managed, there may not really be a stable, predictable version of thing

Re: rcs

On 10/8/13 11:20 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: On 10/8/13 8:04 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: I think the fact is that most direct users of RCS use it in a very simple way, and it works just fine for that. with no real need for any updates or any change. With all due respect Julian, The more we d

Re: rcs

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:03 PM, George Mitchell wrote: > On 10/09/13 03:20, Hans Ottevanger wrote: >> >> On 10/08/13 04:31, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >>> >>> Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? >>> >>> The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and make

Re: rcs

On 10/09/13 03:20, Hans Ottevanger wrote: On 10/08/13 04:31, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and make their technical case. Technically it is quite simple: I need RCS to sta

Re: rcs

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > Hello, Daniel. > You wrote 8 октября 2013 г., 19:40:23: > > DN> If they get the package repositories back up - which I assume will > DN> happen before any official releases from 10 - it should just be "pkg > DN> install rcs". As challenges

Re: rcs

On 10/08/13 04:31, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? > > The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and make their > technical case. > Technically it is quite simple: I need RCS to start versioning config files, even bef

Re: rcs

On 2013-10-08, at 11:17 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: > ​I haven't kept up-to-date with all the developments, but isn't this part of > the bsdinstall/pkgng plan? Once the pkgng repos are all available and > populated, then bsdinstall will be able to install packages from there during > the install

Re: rcs

Hello, Daniel. You wrote 8 октября 2013 г., 19:40:23: DN> If they get the package repositories back up - which I assume will DN> happen before any official releases from 10 - it should just be "pkg DN> install rcs". As challenges go, that doesn't seem too bad? Topic starter mentioned, that assum

Re: rcs

On Oct 8, 2013 1:37 PM, "Cy Schubert" wrote: > > In message om> > , Jos Backus writes: > > On Oct 7, 2013 7:31 PM, "Lyndon Nerenberg" wrote: > > > > > > Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? > > > > > > The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and m

Re: rcs

I've iterated my views on these things a few times. I honestly am not all _that_ interested in trying to build a polished OS. I'd rather participate in building an OS toolkit that let's PCBSD, pfsense, "that storage appliance I keep forgetting the name of (heh)", etc all build OSes on top of it.

Re: rcs

Am 08.10.2013 um 22:29 schrieb Cy Schubert : > > A Red Hat-like kickstart or Solaris jumpstart possibly? > http://blog.hostileadmin.com/2013/04/11/installing-freebsd-via-cobbler/ I wish it was using bsdinstall, though. ___ freebsd-current@fre

Re: rcs

On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Adrian Chadd wrote: I think that's great. But, as we are increasingly finding, theres no stable ports snapshot, so unless we as a project change how packages are managed, there may not really be a stable, predictable version of things once they're moved from base to a packag

Re: rcs

On 10/8/13 11:17 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Alfred Perlstein >wrote: On 10/7/13 9:49 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: On 10/8/13 11:19 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: On 2013-10-07, at 8:15 PM, Steve Kargl mailto:s...

Re: rcs

In message , Jos Backus writes: > On Oct 7, 2013 7:31 PM, "Lyndon Nerenberg" wrote: > > > > Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? > > > > The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and make their > technical case. > > Perhaps slightly off-topic, but h

Re: rcs

In message <525422b6.9040...@mu.org>, Alfred Perlstein writes: > On 10/8/13 8:04 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: > >>> I think the fact is that most direct users of RCS use it in a very > >>> simple way, and > >>> it works just fine for that. with no real need for any updates or any > >>> change. > >

Re: rcs

oops, sent from my non-subscribed email.. On 10/8/13 11:17 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Alfred Perlstein >wrote: On 10/7/13 9:49 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: On 10/8/13 11:19 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: On 2013-10-07, at 8

Re: rcs

I think that's great. But, as we are increasingly finding, theres no stable ports snapshot, so unless we as a project change how packages are managed, there may not really be a stable, predictable version of things once they're moved from base to a package. A number of users and companies like that

Re: rcs

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > You're right on the money, to be honest this is one of the reasons why > I've switched to using OSX as my desktop OS. > > zsh, vim, screen by default. and upgrades work. At the end of the day > I'm spending time doing work, not mucking a

Re: rcs

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > On 10/7/13 9:49 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: > >> On 10/8/13 11:19 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >> >>> On 2013-10-07, at 8:15 PM, Steve Kargl >> edu > wrote: >>> >>> Maybe there was no development for 15 years. However, the 7364 lines

Customising FreeBSD - Was Re: rcs

[ My sympathies lean toward those who want to retain RCS, but as I dont personaly use it, that's all on that. ] ... > "screen, zsh, vim-lite, git" why is that so manual for me? Why can't I > just register a package set somewhere so that all I have to type in is > "alfred.perlstein.devel" into

Re: rcs

On 10/8/13 8:59 AM, Jonathan Anderson wrote: On 8 October 2013 16:04, wrote: > - For some of us, the attraction of FreeBSD is that it is a tightly > integrated system, and the base contains enough useful functionality > that we don't *have* to add a lot of packages. > > - Each package that is mo

Re: rcs

On 8 October 2013 16:04, wrote: > - For some of us, the attraction of FreeBSD is that it is a tightly > integrated system, and the base contains enough useful functionality > that we don't *have* to add a lot of packages. > > - Each package that is moved out of the base system means less useful >

Re: rcs

On Oct 7, 2013 7:31 PM, "Lyndon Nerenberg" wrote: > > Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? > > The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and make their technical case. Perhaps slightly off-topic, but how about we move into the 21st century and import

Re: rcs

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > On 10/7/13 9:49 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: >> >> On 10/8/13 11:19 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >>> >>> On 2013-10-07, at 8:15 PM, Steve Kargl >>> wrote: >>> Maybe there was no development for 15 years. However, the 7364 lines in

Re: rcs

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013, at 10:33, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > Oh I have done that in the past, but why the editing, the makefiles, the > etc, etc, etc. Why isn't there a customize.freebsd.org where I just hit > a few checkboxes, save and then hit download? > A metaport builder web service would

Re: rcs

On 10/8/13 8:26 AM, Andreas Nilsson wrote: On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Alfred Perlstein > wrote: On 10/8/13 8:04 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: I think the fact is that most direct users of RCS use it

Re: rcs

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > On 10/8/13 8:04 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: > >> I think the fact is that most direct users of RCS use it in a very simple way, and it works just fine for that. with no real need for any updates or any change. >>> Wit

Re: rcs

On 10/8/13 8:04 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: I think the fact is that most direct users of RCS use it in a very simple way, and it works just fine for that. with no real need for any updates or any change. With all due respect Julian, The more we discuss this more this really points to the prob

Re: rcs

> > I think the fact is that most direct users of RCS use it in a very > > simple way, and > > it works just fine for that. with no real need for any updates or any > > change. > > With all due respect Julian, The more we discuss this more this really > points to the problem that FreeBSD appea

Re: rcs

On 10/7/13 9:49 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: On 10/8/13 11:19 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: On 2013-10-07, at 8:15 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: Maybe there was no development for 15 years. However, the 7364 lines in ChangeLog after 2010-02-04 suggests that there may be few bugs to worry about. I th

Re: rcs is gone?

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Diane Bruce wrote: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:45:23PM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > > > On 2013-10-07, at 2:53 PM, David Chisnall wrote: > > > > > Or do you really only run the base OS and no other software on your > systems, without any of your own code or

Re: rcs

On 10/8/13 11:19 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: On 2013-10-07, at 8:15 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: Maybe there was no development for 15 years. However, the 7364 lines in ChangeLog after 2010-02-04 suggests that there may be few bugs to worry about. I think the fact is that most direct users of RC

Re: rcs

On 2013-10-07, at 8:15 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: > Maybe there was no development for 15 years. However, the 7364 > lines in ChangeLog after 2010-02-04 suggests that there may > be few bugs to worry about. Dear Troll, Demonstrate one. ___ freebsd-cu

Re: rcs

On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 07:31:01PM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > Okay folks, can we make a call about keeping the RCS tools in the base? > > The proponents wanting to remove RCS need to speak up and make their > technical case. > I don't care if rcs stays or goes, but ... There is a 15 year

Re: rcs is gone?

Glen Barber wrote this message on Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 20:59 -0400: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:54:23PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > > > No, not really. > > > > > > # mkdir local > > > # svnadmin create ./local > > > # svn import /etc file:///$PWD/local > > > > besides the s/svn/

Re: rcs is gone?

On 2013-10-07, at 6:05 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > I don't see any discussion as to why the code (CVS, in this case) *needs* to > be removed. My stupidity: I meant RCS, not CVS. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/

Re: rcs is gone?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 10/07/13 18:37, Adam Vande More wrote: > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Adam Vande More > wrote: > >> >> I would like to see RCS remain in base as well. Many enterprise >> distro still ship it by default too. There is no compelling >> reason

Re: rcs is gone?

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Adam Vande More wrote: > > I would like to see RCS remain in base as well. Many enterprise distro > still ship it by default too. There is no compelling reason to remove it. > I sort of retract that statement. I thought the base RCS was already OpenRCS. I suppo

Re: rcs is gone?

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 10/8/13 9:05 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > >> On 2013-10-07, at 5:58 PM, Ian Lepore wrote: >> >> I have not re-read those threads to see just how much of the discussion >>> involved rcs, I just spot-checked a few and confirmed my memor

Re: rcs is gone?

On 10/8/13 9:05 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: On 2013-10-07, at 5:58 PM, Ian Lepore wrote: I have not re-read those threads to see just how much of the discussion involved rcs, I just spot-checked a few and confirmed my memory that it showed up in some of the messages there. I don't see any dis

Re: rcs is gone?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 10/07/13 17:42, Glen Barber wrote: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:36:42PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote: So there's no version control in the base at all now?.. When did FreeBSD decide to move away from distributing a usable OS? Why n

Re: rcs is gone?

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:03:44AM +0100, Igor Mozolevsky wrote: > On 8 October 2013 01:59, Glen Barber wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:54:23PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > Plus, I was quite reasured that svn isn't smart enough to realize that > > > a path mi

Re: rcs is gone?

On 2013-10-07, at 5:58 PM, Ian Lepore wrote: > I have not re-read those threads to see just how much of the discussion > involved rcs, I just spot-checked a few and confirmed my memory that it > showed up in some of the messages there. I don't see any discussion as to why the code (CVS, in this

Re: rcs is gone?

On 8 October 2013 01:59, Glen Barber wrote: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:54:23PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > [snip] > > Plus, I was quite reasured that svn isn't smart enough to realize that > > a path might be a file: url relative to the current working directory... > > I don't know what

Re: rcs is gone?

On 8 October 2013 01:58, Ian Lepore wrote: > On Mon, 2013-10-07 at 16:49 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > I've asked on IRC to figure out when this was first proposed. I'll see if > > it was announced anywhere or if Eitan snuck it in. > > > > > > -a > > It was mentioned briefly on stable@ > > http:

Re: rcs is gone?

On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:54:23PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > > No, not really. > > > > # mkdir local > > # svnadmin create ./local > > # svn import /etc file:///$PWD/local > > besides the s/svn/svnlite/ you forgot... It doesn't work... Sure it WITH_SVN in src.conf will insta

Re: rcs is gone?

On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > Or do you really only run the base OS and no other software on your > > > systems, without any of your own code or any customisation? > > We install from the base release ISO images burned on DVDs. > > > > We are physically air-gapped from the inte

Re: rcs is gone?

On Mon, 2013-10-07 at 16:49 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > I've asked on IRC to figure out when this was first proposed. I'll see if > it was announced anywhere or if Eitan snuck it in. > > > -a It was mentioned briefly on stable@ http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2012-August/0692

  1   2   >