Doug Barton wrote:
[...]
The fact that we have so many people who are radically change-averse, no
matter how rational the change; is a bug, not a feature.
This particular bug is complicated dramatically by the fact that the
majority view seems to lean heavily towards "If I use it, it must be the
> > The fact that we have so many people who are radically change-averse, no
> > matter how rational the change; is a bug, not a feature.
> >
> > This particular bug is complicated dramatically by the fact that the
> > majority view seems to lean heavily towards "If I use it, it must be the
> > def
Jase Thew wrote:
On 03/12/2011 09:21, Roman Kurakin wrote:
Doug Barton wrote:
[...]
The fact that we have so many people who are radically
change-averse, no
matter how rational the change; is a bug, not a feature.
This particular bug is complicated dramatically by the fact that the
majority
Rik,
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Roman Kurakin wrote:
>> The fact that we have so many people who are radically change-averse, no
>> matter how rational the change; is a bug, not a feature.
>>
>> This particular bug is complicated dramatically by the fact that the
>> majority view seems to l
Hello!
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 8:03 PM, wrote:
> I use CVS (or rather csup) to keep the base system up to date. I would
> be perfectly okay with using a different utility - however, I would
> strongly prefer that this utility was included in the base system.
CVS != csup.
I wonder how many peop
Max Khon wrote:
> As soon as ports/ (and doc/) are moved to SVN I do not see any
> compelling reasons for keeping CVS in the base system.
> Those who still use it for development can install ports/devel/opencvs
Rather ports/devel/cvs-devel. Maybe we still need a regular cvs
port.
--
Christian
On 12/2/11 4:27 AM, Max Khon wrote:
> In my opinion it is just another piece of bitrot that resides in the
> base system for no real reasons.
I agree, especially since all the development work is being done on SVN
and then is exported back to CVS, if I am not mistaken[1]. We've done
the hard part,
On Sat, 3 Dec 2011, Max Khon wrote:
Hello!
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 8:03 PM, wrote:
I use CVS (or rather csup) to keep the base system up to date. I would
be perfectly okay with using a different utility - however, I would
strongly prefer that this utility was included in the base system.
C
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Max Khon wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I know that it is too early to speak about this, but I would like the
> dust in the mailing lists to settle down before real actions can be
> taken.
>
> As soon as ports/ (and doc/) are moved to SVN I do not see any
> compelling reasons
Max Khon wrote:
Rik,
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Roman Kurakin wrote:
The fact that we have so many people who are radically change-averse, no
matter how rational the change; is a bug, not a feature.
This particular bug is complicated dramatically by the fact that the
majority view se
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Roman Kurakin wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>> The fact that we have so many people who are radically change-averse, no
>> matter how rational the change; is a bug, not a feature.
>>
>> This particular bug is complicated dramatically by the fact that the
>
Hi Daniel;
--- On Sat, 12/3/11, Daniel Eischen wrote:
...
>
> I would love to mirror the SVN repo in the same way
> and have an 'svn' in base, or at least something that
> could replace CVS in the above scenario.
>
I have to say I am surprised by all the people that
still use CVS (for their own
Hi. I have many dependencies on CVS that I 'need' 'out of the box'.
Yet at the same time, I would not mind at all if it went to ports.
In fact, and from a general position regarding all third party apps,
I encourage it.
Mostly because they are not authored or maintained by FreeBSD. Yet
they are in
On 12/03/2011 17:29, Sean M. Collins wrote:
[...]
all the development work is being done on SVN
and then is exported back to CVS, if I am not mistaken[1].
[...]
Aren't ports still updated with CVS?
Cheers
Michiel
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org maili
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Michiel Boland wrote:
> On 12/03/2011 17:29, Sean M. Collins wrote:
> [...]
>
>> all the development work is being done on SVN
>> and then is exported back to CVS, if I am not mistaken[1].
>
> [...]
>
> Aren't ports still updated with CVS?
Just to back up that
hail,
I've heard great things about sil3124 and FreeBSD 8+ (saw mav@ talking in lists
and forum). But
I'm planning a home server, I already have an Atom board from Intel (old Atom
330), Soekris
6501-70 and Sil3124 PCI. I saw that both ICH7 and NM10 can't deal with port
multipliers, so my
focus
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote:
> hail,
>
> I've heard great things about sil3124 and FreeBSD 8+ (saw mav@ talking in
> lists and forum). But
> I'm planning a home server, I already have an Atom board from Intel (old Atom
> 330), Soekris
> 6501-70 and Sil3124 PCI. I saw that
On Sat, December 3, 2011 21:06, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Nenhum_de_Nos
> wrote:
>> hail,
>>
>> I've heard great things about sil3124 and FreeBSD 8+ (saw mav@ talking in
>> lists and forum). But
>> I'm planning a home server, I already have an Atom board from Intel
On 12/3/2011 5:03 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
>>> The fact that we have so many people who are radically
>>> change-averse, no matter how rational the change; is a bug, not a
>>> feature.
>>>
>>> This particular bug is complicated dramatically by the fact that
>>> the majority view seems to lean
On 12/3/2011 1:21 AM, Roman Kurakin wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
>> [...] The fact that we have so many people who are radically
>> change-averse, no matter how rational the change; is a bug, not a
>> feature.
>>
>> This particular bug is complicated dramatically by the fact that
>> the majority vi
Why not just run FreeNAS?
Adrian
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
The problem I have with all of this is pretty simple.
With the CVS in base, it's treated like the (mostly) rest of the
system in a stable release - ie, people don't simply keep updating it
to the latest and greatest without some testing. If there are any
critical bugs or security flaws, they're ba
On Sun, December 4, 2011 00:32, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Why not just run FreeNAS?
thanks for the tip on FreeNAS, as others said too.
will it run some other services, as http server for some stuff (wiki for
example), edonkey and
torrent clients, and some other stuff ? (I will visit the FreeNAS sit
On Sun, December 4, 2011 00:46, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote:
>
> On Sun, December 4, 2011 00:32, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Why not just run FreeNAS?
>
> thanks for the tip on FreeNAS, as others said too.
>
> will it run some other services, as http server for some stuff (wiki for
> example), edonkey and
> t
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> The problem I have with all of this is pretty simple.
>
> With the CVS in base, it's treated like the (mostly) rest of the
> system in a stable release - ie, people don't simply keep updating it
> to the latest and greatest without some testin
On 4 December 2011 11:59, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
> Supplying only a console-mode FreeBSD as a release is making FreeBSD
> unusable for
> peoples who they are not computing experts .
And the PCBSD crowd have stepped up to fill this gap.
So we're free to concentrate on doing what we're good
On 03/12/2011 14:48, Roman Kurakin wrote:
Jase Thew wrote:
On 03/12/2011 09:21, Roman Kurakin wrote:
[SNIP]
You are right in general, except one small factor. We are talking about
bootstrap.
CVS is used by many as the one of the ways to get the sources to the
freshly
installed system to r
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote:
>
> On Sun, December 4, 2011 00:46, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, December 4, 2011 00:32, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>> Why not just run FreeNAS?
>>
>> thanks for the tip on FreeNAS, as others said too.
>>
>> will it run some other services, as h
28 matches
Mail list logo
