Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 24 Oct 1998 13:19:03 -0500 (CDT)
From:      rkw@Dataplex.NET
To:        dean@odyssey.apana.org.au
Cc:        freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Stable and CTM
Message-ID:  <199810242001.PAA14768@shrimp.dataplex.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9810250150340.28122-100000@odyssey.apana.org.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 25 Oct, Dean Hollister wrote:
> Why not just use cvsup?

1. cvsup provides a custom update for each individual user. ctm is
   broadcast publication. For a large number of users, cvsup requires
   more server-side resources.
2. cvsup requires a direct realtime connection from the client to a
   cvsup server, ctm uses "store and forward" technology which can even
   run on "sneaker net". The intermediate servers are generic internet
   servers rather than something particular to the particular project.
3. cvsup requires that each machine connect to the cvsup server while
   it parses its tree. Even if there is little changed, this can take
   quite some time. Some connections are very expensive per minute.
   Some connections cannot be maintained for sufficient time to do the
   update.
4. Ctm provides an "audit trail". In the past, this has proven valuable
   when it became necessary to reconstruct the master cvs tree.

Don't misunderstand. Cvsup is a fine way to update certain classes of
users. In fact, the ctm generator uses cvsup to retrieve its input.
However, not everyone fits into the same mould.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199810242001.PAA14768>