Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 22:31:12 -0700 From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: Kirk Strauser <kirk@strauser.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Rewrite cvsup & portupgrade in C Message-ID: <20040707053112.GA35950@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <200407062345.24117.kirk@strauser.com> References: <E1Bhd1M-000KEo-Nz@smp500.sitetronics.com> <200407062323.02854.kirk@strauser.com> <20040707043251.GA35651@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <200407062345.24117.kirk@strauser.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 11:45:23PM -0500, Kirk Strauser wrote: > On Tuesday 06 July 2004 11:32 pm, Steve Kargl wrote: > > > The discussion is about integrating an cvsup knock-off into the base > > system. Can you say bloat? Can you say bugs? > > I guess I just don't see it that way. cvsup is so absolutely necessary for > system maintenance that it seems like a logical addition. I would imagine > that a client-only version in C would be much more heavily developed than the > current ezm3 version. In turn, this should reduce bugs and the eliminate > the need to install what is effectively a single-program language. John previously has posted about his decision to use modulo-3. He chose the best language for the problem he was trying to solve. > >> For example, OpenBSD doesn't have an m3 port for non-x86 platforms > > > So, let Theo write a m3 port. > > I wish he would, because it would probably be more portable then the current > system, which would allow more people to use it, which would turn more > developer eyes toward it, which would give us a better tool to use. As it > stands, cvsup is "that weird thing that FreeBSD uses". EZM3 appears to work on OpenBSD as well as other OSes. http://www.polstra.com/projects/freeware/ezm3/ -- Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040707053112.GA35950>