Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 19:36:27 -0700 (MST) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Jimbo Bahooli <moke@fools.ecpnet.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: anoncvs server Message-ID: <199702250236.TAA19435@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970224192240.2422A-100000@fools.ecpnet.com> References: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970224192240.2422A-100000@fools.ecpnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Is an anoncvs being worked on, or planned to be added soon? I *certainly* don't speak for core, but anoncvs is a *huge* networking/CPU load, much more than CVSup and the CPU load is *much* higher than SUP (though the network load can be better than SUP). > In my brief OpenBSD use the anoncvs setup really made it easy to get > all the source code and do local changes. CVSup is really the solution for people who want to do local changes. Granted, the CVS tree is pretty large, but since disk space is fairly cheap (except on laptops ;( ), people doing local development should get the CVS tree. Note that you don't have to get *everything*, simply the base stuff plus whatever parts of the tree you are working on. You may also need to get the 'contrib' tree, since the addition of it broke the nice separation of each part of the tree from one-another. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702250236.TAA19435>