From owner-freebsd-current Tue Oct 31 19:51:05 1995 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id TAA14472 for current-outgoing; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 19:51:05 -0800 Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id TAA14458 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 19:50:52 -0800 Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id UAA11177; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 20:39:39 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199511010339.UAA11177@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: On the (lack of) reliability of CTM To: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 20:39:39 +1700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Richard Wackerbarth" at Oct 31, 95 07:34:17 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2078 Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > At 5:54 PM 10/31/95, Terry Lambert wrote: > >How do I sup the CVS tree? > > I think they are in the process of fixing it so that you simply replace > "release=current" with "release=cvs" in the sup files. At least that is the > logical way to have it set up. > Then someone in power will have to set up your permissions because the cvs > tree is by invitation only. Well, I'm only interested in read-only access for a cvs diff -r tag -c for a tag on my branch vs. -current (the default tag) to automatically generate my diff's for me instead of having to do it by hand with several finds and awk and sed scripts. A CVS merge and/or cvs -n update would reduce my effort immensely, which would in turn make my diffs "fresher" and more likely to be rolled in. > >I thought CTM was the only method, but it loses. > > I too, have noticed frequent lost updates (xxx-cur). What is the weak link > that causes mail to get lost? > > Perhaps we need to add an ftp-by-mail daemon to allow those missing > segments to be remailed. My problem with CTM is that it doesn't do relative inserts instead of replacing parts of the tree. That means rather than a database merge, I get an updated database. The problem with that approach is that it puts me in exactly the same boat as sup'ping -current, since I will lose any locally generated branch tags. Sup'ping cvs actually is only marginally better, and requires me to keep a local branch. Using two staggered tags and a hellacious update with duplicate tree revisions locally, I could *almost* get the same functionality as a local vendor tag from sup'ping cvs. I really need local tag merge/diff. CTM would require a local rewrite to get the same functionality. 8-(. I think if you are losing updates, it's some other problem unrelated to my dislike of certain functional limitations of CTM. I've been using CVS for going on three years now -- it's not like I'm a newby or anything. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.