Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Ivan Voras
On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote: > (and is GPL btw) Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has proper crypto signing using GPG: http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_Mercurial_hashes_get_calculated.3F signature.asc Description: Ope

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Volodymyr Kostyrko
19.11.2012 14:34, Ivan Voras wrote: On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote: (and is GPL btw) Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has proper crypto signing using GPG: http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_Mercurial_hashes_get_calculated

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Ivan Voras wrote: > On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote: > > > (and is GPL btw) > > Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has > proper crypto signing using GPG: > > > http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/FAQ#FAQ.2FTechnicalDetails.How_do_M

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Ivan Voras
On 19/11/2012 13:47, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote: > 19.11.2012 14:34, Ivan Voras wrote: >> On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote: >> >>> (and is GPL btw) >> >> Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has >> proper crypto signing using GPG: >> >> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wik

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Andriy Gapon
on 18/11/2012 16:17 Chris Rees said the following: > On 18 November 2012 14:04, Adrian Chadd wrote: >> On 18 November 2012 02:48, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> >>> What you describe is not a workflow issue, but a local development >>> environment(s) setup issue. >> >> Which is a workflow issue. >> >> I

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Chris Rees
On 19 Nov 2012 13:05, "Andriy Gapon" wrote: > > on 18/11/2012 16:17 Chris Rees said the following: > > On 18 November 2012 14:04, Adrian Chadd wrote: > >> On 18 November 2012 02:48, Andriy Gapon wrote: > >> > >>> What you describe is not a workflow issue, but a local development > >>> environmen

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Andriy Gapon
on 19/11/2012 03:53 Nathan Whitehorn said the following: > git would be a huge step backward from svn for the central repo in lots of > ways. Dramatic statements ("huge", "lots") require dramatic evidence. > Besides being (in my experience) extremely fragile and error-prone and the Ditto ("extr

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Andriy Gapon
on 19/11/2012 15:08 Chris Rees said the following: > > On 19 Nov 2012 13:05, "Andriy Gapon" > > wrote: >> >> on 18/11/2012 16:17 Chris Rees said the following: >> > On 18 November 2012 14:04, Adrian Chadd > wrote: >> >> On 18 November 2012 02:4

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 5:10 AM, C. P. Ghost wrote: > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Volodymyr Kostyrko > wrote: > > 19.11.2012 14:34, Ivan Voras wrote: > >> > >> On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote: > >> > >>> (and is GPL btw) > >> > >> > >> Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed,

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread C. P. Ghost
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote: > 19.11.2012 14:34, Ivan Voras wrote: >> >> On 17/11/2012 22:48, Chris Rees wrote: >> >>> (and is GPL btw) >> >> >> Since we're discussing it, Mercurial is BSDL-ed, and apparently has >> proper crypto signing using GPG: >> >> >> http://mer

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Alexander Yerenkow
http://www.fossil-scm.org/ I'm not fossil user, but it's BSD licensed in written in C. Baptise Daroussin probably could tell us more about fossil pro and cons. -- Regards, Alexander Yerenkow ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.fr

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Ollivier Robert
According to C. P. Ghost on Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 02:10:40PM +0100: > Even if it was BSD licensed, Mercurial has a huge dependency: > Python; > and Git is Perl-based. So neither of them is ideal, IMHO. Nope, git is almost all C even though some other tools relying on git are in Perl. > If at

Re: Using PC-Sysinstall for automated network installs of FreeBSD

2012-11-19 Thread Mark Saad
On Nov 17, 2012, at 12:19 AM, Warren Block wrote: > On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Mark Saad wrote: > >> On Nov 16, 2012, at 8:44 PM, Warren Block wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Warren Block wrote: >>> Trying to start this from SYSLINUX almost works. My menu config just does >>> >>> Actuall

Re: Using PC-Sysinstall for automated network installs of FreeBSD

2012-11-19 Thread Warren Block
On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Mark Saad wrote: On Nov 17, 2012, at 12:19 AM, Warren Block wrote: On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Mark Saad wrote: On Nov 16, 2012, at 8:44 PM, Warren Block wrote: On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Warren Block wrote: Trying to start this from SYSLINUX almost works. My menu config just

FreeBSD's SCM periodic bikeshed

2012-11-19 Thread Joan Picanyol i Puig
[security@ and questions@ dropped] * Alexander Yerenkow [20121119 14:40]: > http://www.fossil-scm.org/ > > I'm not fossil user, but it's BSD licensed in written in C. > Baptise Daroussin probably could tell us more about fossil pro and cons. Jörg Sonnenberger has bee

Re: Using PC-Sysinstall for automated network installs of FreeBSD

2012-11-19 Thread Sam Fourman Jr.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Warren Block wrote: > On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Mark Saad wrote: > > Useful paths on /export, /export/install/freebsd/9.1/{**i386,amd64} >> this is the contents of the install media rsync'd to a local filesystem >> > > Do you have a way to choose either i386 or amd64

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Zach Leslie
> There's a git repository. It's public. You can look at what goes into > the FreeBSD git clone to get your assurance that things aren't being > snuck in. People are using it, right now. I've always been confused by this. Which source repo is the true source of truth? To obtain the FreeBSD sourc

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Zach Leslie
> http://www.fossil-scm.org/ > > I'm not fossil user, but it's BSD licensed in written in C. > Baptise Daroussin probably could tell us more about fossil pro and cons. This misses one of of the main points raised in the original post. The proliferation of git as a revision control system. Also,

Re: FreeBSD needs Git to ensure repo integrity [was: 2012 incident]

2012-11-19 Thread Eitan Adler
On 19 November 2012 22:04, Zach Leslie wrote: > I've always been confused by this. Which source repo is the true source > of truth? This changed a few months ago when ports and doc switched. As of now: - SVN is *the* source of truth. - CVS is exported from svn. It will eventually go away - g