Eric Siegerman wrote:
> I'd rephrase "there should be no need" to "depending on your
> process, you might be able to get away without it".
I wouldn't. But I will concede that most of the industry has
accepted standards of work in software that could be vastly improved
upon, and my "sh
On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 11:23:48AM -0700, Mike Ayers wrote:
> It also helps to point out that there should be no need to backup the
> sandbox directories.
Well, I wouldn't go that far, for precisely the reasons you
describe:
> This, however, requires that the developers be
> trained to p
Frederic Brehm wrote:
> For performance reasons (I/O throughput during compiles and network
> traffic) you might want to put it on a local disk. Policy makers don't
> always understand performance issues, though.
It also helps to point out that there should be no need to backup the
sa
Alan Dayley writes:
>
> 1. I have been told that the following setup will lead to corruption
> because of esoteric problems in SMB that CVS can bring out:
[client/server CVS with the working directory on a Samba share from the
CVS server machine]
That won't cause corruption, but lots of people
Matthew Navarre writes:
>
> Did you pick that quote manually, or is your sigmonster just unnaturally
> perceptive? :)
Randomly selected Calvin and Hobbes quotes have a tendency to be much
more pointedly applicable than one would expect.
-Larry Jones
Moms and reason are like oil and water. --
At 08:01 PM 9/17/2002, Adam Bregenzer wrote:
>AFIAK the issue is not with where the working copy is stored, as long as
>you are the only one accessing the working copy. The issue is where the
>repository is stored/accessed from.
That's correct. I misunderstood the original question and thought i
AFIAK the issue is not with where the working copy is stored, as long as
you are the only one accessing the working copy. The issue is where the
repository is stored/accessed from. Replacing the CVS protocol that's
using pserver in your diagram with a local protocol accessing the
repository via
This discussion is interesting to me because of the way we are setting up
our CVS and working directories to function. I hope the diagrams draw nice
for everyone.
1. I have been told that the following setup will lead to corruption
because of esoteric problems in SMB that CVS can bring out:
-
On Tuesday 17 September 2002 01:56 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Matthew Navarre writes:
> > That's why I'm basically collecting ammo. They want us to use wincvs with
> > a SMB mounted repo. Since I use FreeBSD this presents something of a
> > problem.
>
> Perhaps you should just recruit someone
At 04:54 PM 9/17/2002, Larry Jones wrote:
>Frederic Brehm writes:
> >
> > The technical reason for the failure has to do with locking in the
> > repository. Locking is a tricky thing to do in a distributed system.
> > Implementations often have subtle bugs.
>
>A number of people have now said that
Matthew Navarre writes:
>
> That's why I'm basically collecting ammo. They want us to use wincvs with a
> SMB mounted repo. Since I use FreeBSD this presents something of a problem.
Perhaps you should just recruit someone to hack in and destroy their
repository or collect some sensitive informa
Frederic Brehm writes:
>
> The technical reason for the failure has to do with locking in the
> repository. Locking is a tricky thing to do in a distributed system.
> Implementations often have subtle bugs.
A number of people have now said that and, while it may be true, it
doesn't apply to CV
At 04:10 PM 9/17/2002, Matthew Navarre wrote:
>That's why I'm basically collecting ammo. They want us to use wincvs with a
>SMB mounted repo. Since I use FreeBSD this presents something of a problem.
Bad, bad, very bad idea. I hope you have enough ammo, now.
Have a CVS server running on the same
On Tuesday 17 September 2002 12:40 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > We've been using CVS with the repository exported via NFS to our UNIX
> > boxen.
>
> This seems to cause an undue amount of repository file corruption, and
> should be avoided.
Yah, I know. I've been trying to change it to using
At 02:57 PM 9/17/2002, Matthew Navarre wrote:
>Could someone explain to me the issues with mounting the repo via a network
>filesystem?
Here's what happened to us: a file was corrupted and we could not recover
older versions. (Our backup administrator failed to verify that the backup
system wa
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:57:30 -0700, Matthew Navarre
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked:
> We've been using CVS with the repository exported via NFS to our UNIX boxen.
> now we need to connect to another cvs repo at a remote site and the only
> access the want to give us is via wincvs with the repository
> We've been using CVS with the repository exported via NFS to our UNIX boxen.
This seems to cause an undue amount of repository file corruption, and
should be avoided.
> now we need to connect to another cvs repo at a remote site and the only
> access the want to give us is via wincvs with th
We've been using CVS with the repository exported via NFS to our UNIX boxen.
now we need to connect to another cvs repo at a remote site and the only
access the want to give us is via wincvs with the repository on a mapped
drive.
Now, just from discussion on this list I realise this is bad. M
18 matches
Mail list logo
