From owner-freebsd-ppc@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 28 00:04:36 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 764F716A435; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:04:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dleimbac@VerariSoft.Com) Received: from VerariSoft.Com (mpi.verarisoft.com [207.203.40.130]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FECC43D49; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:04:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dleimbac@VerariSoft.Com) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (mpi.mpi-softtech.com [207.203.40.130]); by VerariSoft.Com (8.12.8/8.12.8/mpi_1.1) with ESMTP; id j5S04NtN014500; Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:04:26 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <20050627221028.GR14567@elvis.mu.org> References: <20050627081957.GP14567@elvis.mu.org> <20050627221028.GR14567@elvis.mu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v730) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: David Leimbach Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 17:02:47 -0700 To: Maxime Henrion X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.730) Cc: Garance A Drosihn , freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvsup? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the PowerPC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:04:36 -0000 On Jun 27, 2005, at 3:10 PM, Maxime Henrion wrote: > Garance A Drosihn wrote: > >> At 10:19 AM +0200 6/27/05, Maxime Henrion wrote: >> >>> >>> The latest version of the snapshot can be found at : >>> >>> http://mu.org/~mux/csup.html >>> >>> I'd be interested in knowing if it works fine under FreeBSD/ppc. >>> >> >> I downloaded the latest version, and it compiled without any >> problems on powerPC, and seems to be working fine. It is relatively >> slow, but then that was mentioned on the web page. But if you're on >> a platform where we don't have modula-3 support, then it's much >> better >> to have csup as an option, than to have no cvsup-ish option at all! >> >> I don't know if csup results in a larger load on the server that >> it's pointed at. >> > > Yes, csup as it is now should put a much larger load on the server > because it can't send revision numbers (those are contained in the > status file) and only sends MD5 checksums, so the server has to guess > which revision number this MD5 checksum matches. > > >> What I did was 'csup' once, pointing at my own cvsup-mirror. I >> compared that to the src tree I had via other means. I then updated >> my cvsup-mirror, and then updated both the 'csup' src tree and the >> 'cvsup' one. The 'csup' src-tree was updated with all the same >> changes as the 'cvsup' one. >> > > Great, thanks for doing these tests! > > Maxime > Nice I'll hopefully check it out tonight sometime :) Dave