From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri May 17 12:49:33 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id MAA13259 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 17 May 1996 12:49:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (rocky.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA13253 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 12:49:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA28434; Fri, 17 May 1996 13:49:20 -0600 Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 13:49:20 -0600 From: Nate Williams Message-Id: <199605171949.NAA28434@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Warner Losh Cc: Michael Smith , rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth), hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Re(2): Standard Shipping Containers - A Proposal for Distributing FreeBSD In-Reply-To: <199605171908.NAA10080@rover.village.org> References: <199605171908.NAA10080@rover.village.org> Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > : What could be simpler? ctm is fine for people who want read-only > : source, and are willing to carry it all. sup is much better for people > : who like to tinker with their tree. > > Hmmm, with the CVS tree I can have a limited set of uncommitted > chanages and cvs update handles the merging. Sup doesn't do this too > well... Huh? SUP is a distribution mechanism. You can 'SUP' the repository as easily as you can 'CTM' the repository, and CVS will handle the updates just as easily. :) Nate