From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 24 12:05:54 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC1A0106564A for ; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 12:05:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bk0-f54.google.com (mail-bk0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EAFA8FC08 for ; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 12:05:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkcje9 with SMTP id je9so2688915bkc.13 for ; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 05:05:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=qz6kme7GP862ZVsiz8tNVpGyDkPvDUsiiKS3z42bf4U=; b=ik5YcUJm2eEQYJ9qPDb0Mi6Auax3RYjf/EAREJApWUlTXJVD2QbuGn566yJtP9ub8h F/VvmWCrVRDUvVEra2MkOAZQQ+wYVcY4ccxJxl6EEnM7qG+Ab3IZxMm7hh/O6/WrzoLI ts8rC5+nI1rjAI4Ub6TUL6Gjj8zqxBtA9AbPhC127gfyZJ5oWKCSA/oN42ydtL4eezH6 8RsXzJWOY4M8+z2dMDez9fxUL4xnXUoAzKQIEzpPuDV7GqfDQxvJapAHCGONZQO70Jdg y/2Eb/tB/t9/6MFQvAqqlKmSQ4R4UGzPNts510LTUsX1m/bOlljDZaf3W9PL+MDLnEzd OOSQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.12.195 with SMTP id y3mr1607324bky.7.1348488352090; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 05:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.10.141 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 05:05:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.10.141 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 05:05:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <868vbzslug.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <86d31bsrkz.fsf@ds4.des.no> <868vbzslug.fsf@ds4.des.no> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 13:05:51 +0100 Message-ID: From: Chris Rees To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag=2DErling_Sm=F8rgrav?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tinderbox spam X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 12:05:54 -0000 On 24 Sep 2012 12:26, "Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav" wrote: > > Chris Rees writes: > > Have you tried using http:// ? > > Both should work, but svn is significantly faster. Yes, that's why I tried it instead, but my point is that you may need to sleep a bit between tries; if svn is faster, you're more likely to hit any rate limit. I could be wrong, but I can't see any other explanation for the weird failures we've both been seeing. Chris