[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 05/14/2000 05:39:09 PM
>Chris Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> In the past (no longer), I've used or attempted to used RCS and CVS with
>> both AFS and DFS. (I admined AFS for over 6 years, DFS for 2 years). I
>> would avoid the AFS/CVS combination for the following reasons:
>
>I've been using CVS with AFS for years now and it works great. It's a bit
>slower than having a repository on local disk, but ease of backups and
>universal accessibility more than makes up for it.
I use client/server CVS. To get around the backup problems (since my
workstation isn't backed up), I rsync my working directories over to the server
that is backed up. On top of that, I also make local tarballs (since recovery
from backup can be painful here).
>> Bottom line, I would follow the advice of the other person that replied.
>> Use CVS in client/server mode or use a remote filesystem that can handle
>> the POSIX functionality upon which CVS depends, like DFS or NFS (w/ the
>> lock manager).
>
>I couldn't disagree more strongly; that's horrible advice. CVS works
>great on AFS.
I haven't used AFS at all so the following is a wild guess. Could problems
occur in the way CVS creates repository locks? CVS assumes that creating a
directory is an atomic operation. Therefore, if it's able to create a lock
directory, it assumes noone else is able.
Noel
This communication is for informational purposes only. It is not intended as
an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument
or as an official confirmation of any transaction. All market prices, data
and other information are not warranted as to completeness or accuracy and
are subject to change without notice. Any comments or statements made herein
do not necessarily reflect those of J.P. Morgan & Co. Incorporated, its
subsidiaries and affiliates.
