From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 21 13:55:18 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20AFB16A41F for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:55:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from infofarmer@gmail.com) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.202]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B55A543D45 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:55:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from infofarmer@gmail.com) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 8so238771nzo for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 06:55:17 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=b4/eSVemOgo4LAxYOFW30qGXJl4RLy0VbLviGrbq5EtPJRmbXUrZsPoiUnTcqWBtAa3Bu9cwqDaVbz47ejeAWV+FBEpZIUQW4lza1sBwgPIyWfOF93QgHTvu6rt3wK4CHhHJrAe8+jsoV4T8h/JDl46RUzKVmLK3kdLRpO4EYN8= Received: by 10.36.75.2 with SMTP id x2mr510377nza; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 06:55:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.37.20.34 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 06:55:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:55:17 +0400 From: "Andrew P." To: FreeBSD Questions In-Reply-To: <44mzl32dha.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <44mzl32dha.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> Cc: Subject: Re: cvsup from localhost X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:55:18 -0000 On 21 Oct 2005 09:42:25 -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote: > "Andrew P." writes: > > > I run cvsup-mirror at our site. I wonder, what's the > > most efficient way to cvsup the mirror itself. > > Running cvsup'ping from localhost seems to > > create quite a load (disk and CPU) on the machine > > even with compression disabled. > > True. > > Using cvs directly instead of through cvsup > will be less demanding. > Thanks. It haven't occured to me.