Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 21:33:11 +0100 (MET) From: J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de> To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD-current users) Cc: alexis@ww.net Subject: Re: supping CVS home tree Message-ID: <199603132033.VAA12384@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199603131035.NAA03076@dawn.ww.net> from "Alexis Yushin" at Mar 13, 96 01:35:12 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Alexis Yushin wrote: > Is it enough to sup CVS tree with cvs-supfile to be at the edge > of -stable, -current with ports tree? Or do I need to have both CVS > tree -current and -stable? I have no idea about sup, but CVS itself contains the master repos- itory, hence you can always checkout any branch you want. By definition, -current is always the HEAD revision (unbranched), while -stable is by now the ``RELENG_2_1_0'' tag. If you care for bandwidth utilization, and don't have an urgent need to be able to remain -current within less than a few hours latency, better stick with CTM. It is much smarter than sup. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603132033.VAA12384>