Re: where is cvsup?

["Simon 'corecode' Schubert" <corecode@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 06.10.2006, at 10:37, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
> 	Last I checked csup didn't handle repository mode, there are
> alternatives to cvsup for repository copies - but when I used cvsync I
> wound up with a repository copy that missed some updates and rsync is
> slower and harder on the servers than cvsup I think.

cvsync is broken as it re-oders the cvs files so that they are 
incompatible with cvs (in some cases).  cvsup does maintain a supfile, 
so the server doesn't have to scan the repo all the time, so that's 
less resource consuming that rsync, i agree.  nevertheless I don't 
think it is a problem for servers to serve rsync.  when I update my cvs 
tree from chlamydia, the server scans the tree faster than my local 
(faster) box, probably because the tree is already cached in memory.

I think the times for optimizing every last single bit to transfer or 
not are quite over (considering amounts of bandwidth wasted by spam).

cheers
  simon

--
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low €€€ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part