From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 2 16:43:02 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E597E6A for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2013 16:43:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@mu.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BC7816C6 for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2013 16:43:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-9.local (c-67-180-208-218.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.208.218]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6AF011A3C24; Wed, 2 Jan 2013 08:43:01 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50E4638E.2080204@mu.org> Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 08:42:54 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Derek Kulinski Subject: Re: Does / Is anyone maintaining CVS for FreeBSD? References: <12.BF.00942.82514E05@smtp02.insight.synacor.com> <145c92bb-a450-4078-9f82-6ed17123a3ad@email.android.com> In-Reply-To: <145c92bb-a450-4078-9f82-6ed17123a3ad@email.android.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Eitan Adler , FreeBSD , Thomas Mueller , Chris Rees X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 16:43:02 -0000 On 1/2/13 8:05 AM, Derek Kulinski wrote: > Eitan Adler wrote: > >> On 2 January 2013 06:26, Chris Rees wrote: >>> To clarify, no-one wants to remove CVS completely, the suggestion was >> to >>> move it out of the base system. >> As the developer responsible for this: >> >> CVS will be removed from base. It already exists as a port in >> devel/cvs > Will svn be added to the base? Not long ago I run into an issue when trying to downgrade my system to 9.0. > > After I noticed how majority of ports were broken due to changes in the libc I decided to back out by fetching 9.1 release just to learn that svn does not work as well. There were a lot of dependencies I decided to use portupgrade which required me to recompile ruby. After that it was a lot of compiling (for example Apache because apr was broken). Having svn in the base would save tons of time in my situation. > Sorry, you needed to fetch 9.0 packages then*. Putting all of that in base is not likely to happen. * I wish doing this was somewhat more intuitive/easy -Alfred