From owner-freebsd-current Wed Sep 4 09:58:40 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA20854 for current-outgoing; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 09:58:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from austin.polstra.com (austin.polstra.com [206.213.73.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA20847; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 09:58:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from austin.polstra.com (jdp@localhost) by austin.polstra.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA18063; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 09:58:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199609041658.JAA18063@austin.polstra.com> To: jhs@FreeBSD.org Cc: current@FreeBSD.org, gibbs@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: Latest Current build failure In-reply-to: <199609041519.IAA16653@freefall.freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 09:58:30 -0700 From: John Polstra Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Julian Stacey : > >CTM is asynchronous to net disturbances, so ideal for those with > >poor net access, whereas cvsup requires a net in good condition. Justin Gibbs : > This isn't true since CVSup is a streaming protocol instead of a > synchronous like SUP. I know quite a few people who switched from > CTM to CVSup that have poor links to the net. Justin is right. CVSup works very well under poor network conditions. That was one of the primary design goals. In fact, CVSup almost certainly works better under adverse conditions than SMTP, which delivers your CTM updates. Julian, have you even _tried_ CVSup?? I watch the server logs pretty closely, and I don't recall seeing your name in them. It's not in anybody's interest to start a "CVSup vs. CTM" war. They each have advantages and disadvantages. People are welcome to use the one that serves their needs the best. (Sup, on the other hand, can die die die, as far as I'm concerned. ;-) But if you're going to comment publically on either CVSup or CTM, you really ought to know what you're talking about first. -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Self-knowledge is always bad news." -- John Barth