From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 19 16:40:26 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 886A41065672 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 16:40:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mailnull@mips.inka.de) Received: from mail-in-16.arcor-online.net (mail-in-16.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.56]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 413238FC08 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 16:40:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-in-10-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-10-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.27]) by mx.arcor.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A45808AF6 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 17:09:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-in-17.arcor-online.net (mail-in-17.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.57]) by mail-in-10-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 919E6C6 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 17:09:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from lorvorc.mips.inka.de (dslb-092-075-204-146.pools.arcor-ip.net [92.75.204.146]) by mail-in-17.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6943610D792 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 17:09:27 +0100 (CET) X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 mail-in-17.arcor-online.net 6943610D792 Received: from lorvorc.mips.inka.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lorvorc.mips.inka.de (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pAJG9Pnt055845 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 17:09:25 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from mailnull@lorvorc.mips.inka.de) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by lorvorc.mips.inka.de (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id pAJG9Ptb055844 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 17:09:25 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from mailnull) From: naddy@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 16:09:25 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20111115094823.GA9461@sh4-5.1blu.de> <4EC2466B.3020808@infracaninophile.co.uk> Originator: naddy@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs checkout ./. csup X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 16:40:26 -0000 Matthew Seaman wrote: > Efficiency, basically. csup should require less bandwidth and put less > load on servers than using cvs directly. It works like rsync, Actually, csup is much more efficient than rsync because it can cache the meta information and so doesn't have to perform a stat() on each file. That doesn't matter so much on the client (compare plain csup vs. csup -s), but it is quite significant on the server. And anon cvs is just an enormous hog on the server side. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de