Date: Mon, 27 Feb 95 17:22:27 MST From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: phk@ref.tfs.com (Poul-Henning Kamp) Cc: nate@trout.sri.MT.net, jkh@freefall.cdrom.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Binary compatibility with NetBSDk Message-ID: <9502280022.AA04262@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199502280018.QAA27740@ref.tfs.com> from "Poul-Henning Kamp" at Feb 27, 95 04:18:25 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > Would CTM'ing the library portion of the NetBSD tree be satisfactory? > > > > > > What would you expect this to do ? > > > > Keep the history that Nate is unhappy about losing even if FreeBSD > > is only an OEM of the library code and doesn't really need the history > > itself. > > I guess you mean CVS then. CTM is more like "rdist" than like "CVS"... I was under the impression (from the name, more than anything else) that the software actually Mirrored CVS Trees. If so, then comments would be included. CVS can easily handle the actual database instantiation using a vendor branch (where NetBSD is the vendor). If not, then there needs to be a tree+history export/import facility, and Nate has indeed found a small hole in the plan. 8-(. Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9502280022.AA04262>