Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 12:05:25 -0500 From: "Isaac (.ike) Levy" <ike@blackskyresearch.net> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: Mike Leone <mike.leone@axialmarket.com> Subject: Re: svn - but smaller? Message-ID: <1358960762-2331017.37282719.fr0NH5PFb026896@rs149.luxsci.com> In-Reply-To: <510007F4.20701@sentex.net> References: <20130123144050.GG51786@e-Gitt.NET> <87mww00w89.fsf@Shanna.FStaals.net> <20130123153724.GA79995@e-Gitt.NET> <510007F4.20701@sentex.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
One of my teammates and I were just doing a write up on this very issue, On Jan 23, 2013, at 10:55 AM, Mike Tancsa wrote: > On 1/23/2013 10:37 AM, Oliver Brandmueller wrote: >>=20 >> But my main concern is the system sources anyway. freebsd-update is = not=20 >> feasible for me, as described in the original post. >>=20 > Actually, if you build the port minus the NEON option, its as bad in > terms of dependencies. -------- THE UGLY Source for SVN: 496M (+) Source for FreeBSD 9.1: 746M (actual) (df output details below) ------- THE BAD After 15+ years of FreeBSD use, I remember what a great thing cvsup was = when it hit. However, SVN presents several problems for OS use (again): 1) License. Many of SVN's dependencies will never be available in the = FreeBSD source. While this is totally OK for development, SVN is 3rd party software, = this is unacceptable to force as 'the' respected path for OS source = builds. 2) Heft: cvsup/csup was excellent for 1 thing: grabbing a REL branch. = Perhaps grabbing STABLE or CURRENT. Systems administrators could = QA/test new branches on massive numbers of servers quickly and = efficiently. -------- THE GOOD We've just resolved this for ourselves, and are wrapping it in a clean = sh script: (I'd love to know where we can send it for input when we're done?) 40 lines of shell could get the jist of what users really need: - Download the src using fetch(1) fetch = ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/amd64/9.1-RELEASE/src.txz - Extract the tarball (to /usr/src, or wherever). tar -xf src.txz We're hacking out some simple script add-ons out right now for = ourselves, to make this more CVSUP like: + flag to keep source tarball somewhere (instead of merely un-tarring it = in a pipe) + flag to un-tar source to a particular directory + flag to specify OS version + flag to specify RELEASE, STABLE, CURRENT (if they exist, CURRENT may be tricky?) + define source server/mirror + source config in /etc, (or rc.conf ?), if exists -- Nice-to-have extra features (some necessary for us): + define protocol (tricky), e.g. ftp/http/https/other + after unpacking, run against mtree (possibly kept on separate server = or locally) to validate sources + exit non-zero if particular conditions exist + checksum tarball (possibly against checksums kept on separate server = or locally) to validate sources + exit non-zero if particular conditions exist + flags to override/change tar options ++ also nice to have, more cvsup features, (I need to read through man = page again for a sanity check) -- Regarding SVN: I know the SVN change is a profound leap foreword in source management = and collaboration, (I've carried many shops through CVS/SVN/GIT = migrations as an SA). Developing/hacking in the FreeBSD source is already simpler, though as = an outsider, (no commit bit), the transition has been expectedly = rough-edged :) On Jan 23, 2013, at 10:06 AM, Ronald Klop wrote: > I've read about this initiative. > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/user/des/svnsup/ > Maybe you can help there. Aside from the heft/licence issues I noted above, it's a bit late to = consider this, cvsup is going away: - the *ports* CVS/csup infrastructure is going to be disabled on = Feburary 28th - the *source* CVS/csup infrastructure is deprecated, but doesn't have a = definite end-date On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 04:12:22PM +0100, Frank Staals wrote: >> I'm kind of surprised for the need of this though. Why not simply use >> portsnap if you are not actively developing ports?=20 >=20 On Jan 23, 2013, at 10:37 AM, Oliver Brandmueller wrote: > But my main concern is the system sources anyway. freebsd-update is = not=20 > feasible for me, as described in the original post. For users/administrators, to merely fetch OS sources for a given branch, = it goes against the grain of nearly every reason users use FreeBSD to = say 'just use svn'. Additionally, it's not been fun recently to 'just use portssnap', when = the actual binary ports servers have gone through the recent security = incident, (as well as all the changes). I'm not meaning to be negative here, but this has slid pretty far away = from the ideals that *BSD users care about. Best, .ike # uncompressed canonical sources for svn (I believe I missed some = dependencies of the dependencies) du -d 1 -h 5.5M ./apr-1.4.6 5.3M ./sqlite-amalgamation-3071300 13M ./libtool-2.4.2 79M ./perl-5.16.2 4.0M ./neon-0.29.6 66M ./Python-2.7.1 153M ./db-5.3.21 55M ./subversion-1.7.8 8.6M ./m4-1.4.16 3.0M ./expat-2.1.0 12M ./pkg-config-0.27.1 3.0M ./gdbm-1.10 67M ./gettext-0.18.1.1 21M ./libiconv-1.14 496M . ## FreeBSD 9.1 Source $ pwd ; du -d 1 -h /usr/src 3.2M ./bin 11M ./cddl 316M ./contrib 40M ./crypto 2.0M ./etc 3.7M ./games 5.9M ./gnu 1.1M ./include 484k ./kerberos5 31M ./lib 2.1M ./libexec 1.3M ./release 32k ./rescue 7.2M ./sbin 3.6M ./secure 39M ./share 200M ./sys 44M ./tools 13M ./usr.bin 18M ./usr.sbin 746M .
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1358960762-2331017.37282719.fr0NH5PFb026896>