From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 22 14:26:05 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C5B3EAF for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:26:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sola.nimnet.asn.au (paqi.nimnet.asn.au [115.70.110.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7314BD1 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:26:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sola.nimnet.asn.au (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id t0MEPfrL091031; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 01:25:42 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 01:25:41 +1100 (EST) From: Ian Smith To: Andrew Berg Subject: Re: Request for comments - svnup in base ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20150123001645.Y22179@sola.nimnet.asn.au> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Polytropon , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:26:05 -0000 In freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 555, Issue 1, Message: 10 On Sun, 18 Jan 2015 12:16:31 -0600 Andrew Berg wrote: > On 2015.01.18 11:45, Ian Smith wrote: > > svnlite only arrived with 10.1, so is not what 8.x and 9.x users need. > 10.0, not 10.1. I am a bit surprised that it wasn't backported to 9.3, though. Hmm, well if that's so, man.cgi hss it wrong; it only shows up when selecting 10.1 or 10-stable, not 10.0. But then, I've found a few odd things in man.cgi the last couple of months so I'm not confident I can trust it re what versions support various things lately - like this one? One example; enter 'pkg' with default settings, you get pkg(7) which of course has links to pkg(8) - clicking on which meet 'not found' unless you select AND PORTS. For another, try looking for 'ep'; you get nothing unless you know in advance that you have to pick 'i386'; I think the 'default' architecture (presumably amd64?) should say 'ANY'. svn(1) is available as a port for 9.3, but not svnlite(1) .. and I think neither deserve their (1) until there's a real 'how to use it' manual. > > So just how 'lite' is svnlite? Could someone running 10.1+ please > > replace svnup with svnlite in equivalents to the following queries: > > > > smithi@x200:~ % ll `which svnup` > > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 47040 Jan 19 01:26 /usr/local/bin/svnup > [candace ~]# ls -l $(which svnlite) > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 3210464 Jan 3 22:26 /usr/bin/svnlite Yeah, under 1.5% :) > > smithi@x200:~ % ldd `which svnup` > > /usr/local/bin/svnup: > > libmd.so.5 => /lib/libmd.so.5 (0x800824000) > > libssl.so.6 => /usr/lib/libssl.so.6 (0x800a34000) > > libc.so.7 => /lib/libc.so.7 (0x800c8a000) > > libcrypto.so.6 => /lib/libcrypto.so.6 (0x800fe5000) > [candace ~]# ldd $(which svnlite) > /usr/bin/svnlite: > libbsdxml.so.4 => /lib/libbsdxml.so.4 (0x800b29000) > libz.so.6 => /lib/libz.so.6 (0x800d50000) > libcrypt.so.5 => /lib/libcrypt.so.5 (0x800f66000) > libmagic.so.4 => /usr/lib/libmagic.so.4 (0x801186000) > libcrypto.so.7 => /lib/libcrypto.so.7 (0x8013a4000) > libssl.so.7 => /usr/lib/libssl.so.7 (0x801798000) > libthr.so.3 => /lib/libthr.so.3 (0x801a03000) > libc.so.7 => /lib/libc.so.7 (0x801c28000) In both cases, pretty standard libraries. > > smithi@x200:~ % ll /lib/libmd.so.5 /usr/lib/libssl.so.6 /lib/libc.so.7 /lib/libcrypto.so.6 > > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 1407536 Jun 25 2014 /lib/libc.so.7 > > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 1748528 Jun 25 2014 /lib/libcrypto.so.6 > > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 69072 Jun 25 2014 /lib/libmd.so.5 > > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 355576 Jun 25 2014 /usr/lib/libssl.so.6 > [candace ~]# ls -l /lib/libbsdxml.so.4 /lib/libz.so.6 /lib/libcrypt.so.5 > /usr/lib/libmagic.so.4 /lib/libcrypto.so.7 /usr/lib/libssl.so.7 > /lib/libthr.so.3 /lib/libc.so.7 > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 161760 Jan 3 22:25 /lib/libbsdxml.so.4 > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 1647720 Jan 3 22:25 /lib/libc.so.7 > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 62008 Jan 3 22:25 /lib/libcrypt.so.5 > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 2038496 Jan 3 22:26 /lib/libcrypto.so.7 > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 106120 Jan 3 22:25 /lib/libthr.so.3 > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 89576 Jan 3 22:25 /lib/libz.so.6 > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 123976 Jan 3 22:25 /usr/lib/libmagic.so.4 > -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 439776 Jan 3 22:26 /usr/lib/libssl.so.7 My, how things have grown between 9.3 and 10.1. But that's not so much extra, I guess working out the size of svnlite's installed dependencies would be more revealing. I haven't a 10.x system to check, and I'm not assuming it carries most of svn's load, but svnup(1) has none at all. > > smithi@x200:~ % du -hd0 /usr/src > > 830M /usr/src > > smithi@x200:~ % du -hd0 /usr/ports > > 1.6G /usr/ports Sorry, ports was completely bogus; including over 500MB of distfiles .. > [candace ~]# du -hd0 /usr/src > 783M /usr/src Similar; I've got a few patches and diffs in there. > and FWIW: > [candace ~]# du -sh /usr/src/.svn > 398M /usr/src/.svn You mean your /usr/src without .svn/ would only be 385M? That seems small, unless it's compressed? Also, perhaps .svn/ is compressed now? I was saying 'almost double' from the /usr/ports/.svn that accompanied the ports distribution with 9.2-R. > This is a two-week-old checkout of 10-STABLE (from which the aforementioned > binaries were built). > I don't have a ports tree from SVN (both trees I use for poudriere are using > portsnap at the moment). I've never had an issue with portsnap, though we see some say they have. I wouldn't recommend using svnup for ports either, but haven't tried it. > I'm not sure any of the above matters too much, but I might do a speed > comparison of svn, svnup, and svnlite, which I think will be the most important > for most people if they are indeed that much different from each other in that > regard. If you do, be sure to compare an initial fetch of a tree to small (or no change) updates. svnup used to be kinda slow on initially fetching and building a tree, and quite fast enough, for me, for incrementals. Also check svn vs http vs https methods. I need to do more tests too. Again, svnup is specifically for non-developer, more casual updaters. > On a side note, backticks are bad and you shouldn't use them. :P Because? > > Bottom line: I don't think plugging to get svnup into base is worth > > pursuing. Few developers took any interest that I noticed, it was > > largely tested by users. John Mehr has been very responsive to any > > issues. To one to whom C is mostly read-only, it reads very well. > > > > I think it's ok as a port .. perhaps a small section in the Handbook? > A mention in the handbook would definitely be good. Yeah; I wish I wan't so crap at documentation, too verbose by half .. now if we could convince Warren to check it out .. :) Polytropon's point about documentation stands. svn is deep and wide; there are primers and wiki pages for those getting their teeth into it, but its manpage could at least point to something immediately useful. Polytropon wrote: > Good documentation is an essential point, no matter if > you see it as a developer or as a user. Both "man cvs" > and "man csup" fulfill that requirement. As does do svnup(1) and svnup.conf(5). Pretty painless to check out; you can point it elsewhere than /usr/src to play around and compare. cheers, Ian