Donald,
>CVS doesn't have a internal rsh protocol. It uses the rsh command.
I believe you are mistaken here. The :ext: method specifies using an
external rsh command, but :server: specifies CVS's internal rsh protocol:
The Cederqvist manual (and who am I do question "the manual"?), under the
section, "Connecting with rsh", says:
"There are two access methods that you can use in CVSROOT for rsh. :server:
specifies an internal rsh client, which is supported only by some CVS ports.
:ext: specifies an external rsh program."
And Karl Fogel, in "Open Source Development with CVS", says:
":server:<username>@<machinename>:/<path>" -- Like :ext:, but uses CVS's
internal implementation of rsh. (This may not be available on all
platforms.)"
>The rsh that comes with NT is incompatible with the rsh that
>we all know and love on unix. Do yourself a favour and convert
>over to the pserver mode...
I believe that's why my previous employer used the :server: method (internal
rsh client). Connecting to a Unix CVS server from NT using this method
worked perfectly, without any problems whatsoever. This tells me that: 1)
CVS does indeed have an internal rsh protocol, and 2) it is, in fact,
supported by the Windows NT port of the CVS client.
Again, using :pserver: didn't solve the problem I am having today, which as
you state in your second message, appears to be a host name resolution
issue. I'll play with that idea a little more and see else what I can find
out.
Thanks,
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Donald Sharp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2000 3:41 AM
To: Dennis Jones
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Help with client/server CVS and interoperability with NT/98
CVS doesn't have a internal rsh protocol. It uses the rsh command.
The rsh that comes with NT is incompatible with the rsh that
we all know and love on unix. Do yourself a favour and convert
over to the pserver mode...
donald
On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 05:17:44PM -0700, Dennis Jones wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> I know similar questions have been raised here in this mailing list, but
my problem seems to be slightly different than other's I've seen posted. I
hope you'll forgive my intrusion and ignorance as a Unix newbie.
>
> I am not a very experienced Linux/Unix user, but I used CVS quite
extensively in my last job (and it worked quite nicely, thank you).
However, my new employer does not have any kind of source code control in
place and I would like to setup a CVS server and repository on a Linux box
for access from other Linux boxes, as well as NT and '98 boxes. At my
previous employer, we did not use 'pserver' mode and everything worked just
fine, so I thought I would try the same method here. We just specified
CVSROOT as:
>
> <machine name>:/<path to repository>
>
> According to the Cederqvist manual, this format should use CVS's internal
rsh protocol. However, I'm getting different results from NT, '98 and Linux
machines.
>
> NT machines say, "cvs [checkout aborted]: no such host <machine name>
> '98 machines say, "cvs [checkout aborted]: cannot connect to socket:
Connection refused
> Linux machines say, "<machine name>: Unknown host
> cvs [checkout aborted]: end of file from server (consult above messages if
any)"
>
> (where <machine name> is the host name of the Linux box where I've created
my repository)
>
> Using CVS locally on the repository machine works fine.
>
> Clearly, the repository machine is set up correctly for this method of
client/server connection, but I have no idea what to try. We do not have a
Unix administrator here, and I'm the only person here that's even heard of
CVS.
>
> In frustration, I did try the 'pserver' method, but I had similar
difficulties.
>
> We are using CVS v1.10.5 (from RedHat Linux 6.0?) on the Linux side, and
v1.10 on the Windows side.
>
> It is extremely important that we get CVS working here, and I'm in over my
head. If anyone can provide expert help, I would be very appreciative. We
might even consider paying someone to travel here and help us get set up.
Anyone interested? (We are only a couple-hour drive from the SF bay area,
if you are close-by).
>
> - Dennis
