On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 09:39 +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> > Most svn side operations create subpools for loops that may allocate
> > per-iteration memory due to calls to other functions, etc, and clear it
> > each iteration to avoid such per iteration allocations become too large.
> > Some don't.
> Most svn side operations create subpools for loops that may allocate
> per-iteration memory due to calls to other functions, etc, and clear it
> each iteration to avoid such per iteration allocations become too large.
> Some don't.
FWIW, the first (and only) time I tried to do a svn diff on lots
Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 11:23:20PM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
| > If you email clkao, and tell him what ops are using tons of memory,
| > preferrably with simple reproduction recipes (IE "run svk status on this
| > directory, and memory usage will g
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 11:23:20PM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> If you email clkao, and tell him what ops are using tons of memory,
> preferrably with simple reproduction recipes (IE "run svk status on this
> directory, and memory usage will go up to 50 billion gigabytes"), he'll
> likely just fix
On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 00:58 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | > On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 05:07:12PM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> |
> | >>(2) Is it normal that "svk push" takes more than 5 minute
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 05:07:12PM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
|
| >>(2) Is it normal that "svk push" takes more than 5 minutes to complete?
| >>If so, that does not match the speed argumen
Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 05:07:12PM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>(2) Is it normal that "svk push" takes more than 5 minutes to complete?
>>If so, that does not match the speed argument I've seen for the
>>move to SVN.
> SVN is
Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 17:07 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > [...]
| >
| > | There's a lot to be learned (for me at least) about using svk. At some
| > | point I will update the wiki with useful
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 17:07 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> | There's a lot to be learned (for me at least) about using svk. At some
> | point I will update the wiki with useful bits, but I don't have many
> | just yet. For instance,
>Merging back to mirror source svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc.
You need to use svn+ssh:// . svn:// is anonymous readonly access.
Paul
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 05:07:12PM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> At the moment, my attempts to commit patches (based on SVK) have met
> failures and generated lot of frustration.
Sorry, I can't help you. Hopefully someone else can, or you should try
on the svk list.
>(2) Is it normal that
Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
| There's a lot to be learned (for me at least) about using svk. At some
| point I will update the wiki with useful bits, but I don't have many
| just yet. For instance, two open questions while I was writing this:
|
| - how to make svk ref
Yes, of course, but what if you've checked out using a read-only
protocol? Is it going to fall down? Refuse to commit entirely?
You can use svk mirror --relocate before and after svn push --lump.
Paolo
On 11/8/05, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Isn't this, creating local branches, is a local operation ?
>
> //gcc is a mirrored location. You have to create your branches outside
> of there; try /svkgcc/local-gcc in your example.
Yes, this works.
Thanks,
-
Devang
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 06:41:05PM -0800, Devang Patel wrote:
> On 11/8/05, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It will simply tell you you don't have access :)
>
> However, it is rejecting local branch creation also.
>
> ---
> $ svk ls /svkgcc/gcc/local_branches
> Path /gcc/local_bra
On 11/8/05, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It will simply tell you you don't have access :)
However, it is rejecting local branch creation also.
---
$ svk ls /svkgcc/gcc/local_branches
Path /gcc/local_branches is not a versioned directory
bardoli:~ bardoli$ svk mkdir /svkgcc/gcc/loca
On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 13:56 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:47:52PM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > If you try to commit to the mirror, it will try to commit to the
> > underlying repo.
> >
> > That's how svk push actually works.
>
> Yes, of course, but what if you've
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:47:52PM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> If you try to commit to the mirror, it will try to commit to the
> underlying repo.
>
> That's how svk push actually works.
Yes, of course, but what if you've checked out using a read-only
protocol? Is it going to fall down? Refus
On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 13:42 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 10:37:13AM -0800, Devang Patel wrote:
> > On 11/7/05, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > I have generated an SVK repository to go with this. As anyone who's
> > > doing or don
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 10:37:13AM -0800, Devang Patel wrote:
> On 11/7/05, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > I have generated an SVK repository to go with this. As anyone who's
> > doing or done this themselves can attest, it takes a long time and a
> > lot of RAM an
On 11/7/05, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> I have generated an SVK repository to go with this. As anyone who's
> doing or done this themselves can attest, it takes a long time and a
> lot of RAM and a whole ton of I/O.
Yes, it takes very long time, few hours before I inte
On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 03:29:25PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> For those who want a starting point to mirror the entire repo from, i
> have placed an rzip'd (http://rzip.samba.org) copy of the repository in
>
> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure/gccrepo.tar.rz
>
>
> It is 549 meg and ex
Daniel Berlin wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-10-28 at 22:40 +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
>> > I am still working on tarballs of a .svk/local dir for people.
>>
>> Any reason you're doing a tarball instead of a bootstrap dump?
>> http://svk.elixus.org/?SVKBootStrap
>
>
> Same thing, more or less :)
Yes and
On Fri, 2005-10-28 at 22:40 +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> > I am still working on tarballs of a .svk/local dir for people.
>
> Any reason you're doing a tarball instead of a bootstrap dump?
> http://svk.elixus.org/?SVKBootStrap
Same thing, more or less :)
> I am still working on tarballs of a .svk/local dir for people.
Any reason you're doing a tarball instead of a bootstrap dump?
http://svk.elixus.org/?SVKBootStrap
Paul
On Fri, 2005-10-28 at 15:29 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> For those who want a starting point to mirror the entire repo from, i
> have placed an rzip'd (http://rzip.samba.org) copy of the repository in
>
> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure/gccrepo.tar.rz
>
>
Finger slipped.
This won't b
For those who want a starting point to mirror the entire repo from, i
have placed an rzip'd (http://rzip.samba.org) copy of the repository in
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure/gccrepo.tar.rz
It is 549 meg and expands to 8.5 gig.
Before someone says "wow, just use rzip in subversion", we
27 matches
Mail list logo
