Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 18:40:46 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net> To: "Richard Wackerbarth" <rkw@dataplex.net> Cc: "FreeBSD Hackers" <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>, "FreeBSD Current" <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>, "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Standard Shipping Containers - A Proposal for Distributing FreeBSD Message-ID: <199605170040.SAA25150@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <n1379851927.76789@Richard Wackerbarth> References: <n1379851927.76789@Richard Wackerbarth>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> The Distribution: > There are seven distribution channels upon which I will comment. > 1) Direct access to the master tree. This really applies only > to the cvs tree and is "the only way to go" for commiters > who are well connected. > 2) Using "mirror". > 3) Using "mirror" with directory listing cached on the server. > 4) Using "sup". > 5) Using "ctm". > 6) Using distribution tarballs. > 7) Using the "live file system" from CD. > > Characteristics of the Distribution Mechanisms. > a) Only (1) and (2) provide "up to the minute" copies. Not true. If you have direct access to freefall (developers only), you can use (4-sup) to get "up to the minute" copies of the CVS tree. Occassionaly I re-sup the tree in the middle of the day if I want to make sure the changes I've made are valid. > The Proposal. > Since all the reasonable distribution mechanisms are based upon > server initiated snapshots Since your assumptions are invalid for one of the two most common distribution method, the rest of the proposal is not completely valid. natehome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605170040.SAA25150>