From owner-freebsd-current  Thu May 23 15:08:32 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id PAA25692
          for current-outgoing; Thu, 23 May 1996 15:08:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DATAPLEX.NET (SHARK.DATAPLEX.NET [199.183.109.241])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA25684
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 23 May 1996 15:08:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 199.183.109.242 by DATAPLEX.NET
 with SMTP (MailShare 1.0fc5); Thu, 23 May 1996 17:08:32 -0600
Message-ID: <n1379251172.91030@Richard Wackerbarth>
Date: 23 May 1996 17:08:19 -0500
From: "Richard Wackerbarth" <rkw@dataplex.net>
Subject: Re(2): CTM & cvs update 
To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@critter.tfs.com>,
        "Wolfram Schneider" <wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de>
Cc: "current@freebsd.org" <current@freebsd.org>
X-Mailer: Mail*Link PT/Internet 1.6.0
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Wolfram Schneider writes:

> > A full cvs update takes me 1952.43 real 92.37 user 190.84 sys
> > This is slow. Can I use the output from ctm_rmail for a faster
> > update? E.g.:
> > 
> > $ ctm_rmail [options] > ctm_output_log_file 2>&1
> > $ cvs  update `egrep ' > .. (src|ports)/' <ctm_output_log_file> > >    |
awk '{print $NF}' | sed 's/,v$//'`

Poul-Henning Kamp replies:

> If you make an option to ctm_rmail to do it, I'll review and approve even if
you write it in COBOL :-)

Please don't add more bloat to ctm_rmail. His solution seems fine and in the
Unix tradition.

As I read his message, he simply wants to know if it would work.

--

...computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh
only 1/2 tons.      --  Popular Mechanics, March 1949