From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 18 18:32:21 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D170113 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2015 18:32:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0102.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.protection.outlook.com", Issuer "MSIT Machine Auth CA 2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6BDAD79 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2015 18:32:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.0.0.21] (73.5.142.244) by BY1PR0301MB0840.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (25.160.193.146) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.59.20; Sun, 18 Jan 2015 18:16:39 +0000 Message-ID: <54BBF87F.5080003@my.hennepintech.edu> Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 12:16:31 -0600 From: Andrew Berg User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Subject: Re: Request for comments - svnup in base ? References: <20150119024349.T82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> In-Reply-To: <20150119024349.T82172@sola.nimnet.asn.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [73.5.142.244] X-ClientProxiedBy: BL2PR05CA0047.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.255.226.47) To BY1PR0301MB0840.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (25.160.193.146) Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=aberg010@my.HennepinTech.edu; X-DmarcAction-Test: None X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:; X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(3005004);SRVR:BY1PR0301MB0840; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004); SRVR:BY1PR0301MB0840; X-Forefront-PRVS: 046060344D X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(979002)(6049001)(6009001)(199003)(24454002)(189002)(51704005)(77156002)(2950100001)(65816999)(450100001)(50986999)(76176999)(86362001)(64706001)(97736003)(87976001)(54356999)(89122001)(110136001)(64126003)(87266999)(19580395003)(80316001)(77096005)(88552001)(68736005)(66066001)(46102003)(65956001)(59896002)(33656002)(62966003)(19580405001)(50466002)(101416001)(65806001)(23676002)(106356001)(107886001)(40100003)(2351001)(47776003)(83506001)(92566002)(105586002)(122386002)(75432002)(42186005)(89472002)(969003)(989001)(999001)(1009001)(1019001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY1PR0301MB0840; H:[10.0.0.21]; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:ovrnspm; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:0; MX:1; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: my.HennepinTech.edu does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY1PR0301MB0840; X-OriginatorOrg: my.hennepintech.edu X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jan 2015 18:16:39.9699 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY1PR0301MB0840 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: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 18:32:21 -0000 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. > It doesn't appear as an available port for 9.3. Its manpage is useless, > an s/svn/svnlite/g job on svn(1), neither of which instruct in usage at > all, referring to a site that, nowhere that I could find, even mentions > svnlite and friends. Developer friendly, casual user hostile at best. The svn(1) man page isn't very useful either. However, I do agree that the documentation could be a lot better at explaining what svnlite is and how it differs from normal svn. > 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 > 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) > > 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 > > smithi@x200:~ % du -hd0 /usr/src > 830M /usr/src > smithi@x200:~ % du -hd0 /usr/ports > 1.6G /usr/ports [candace ~]# du -hd0 /usr/src 783M /usr/src and FWIW: [candace ~]# du -sh /usr/src/.svn 398M /usr/src/.svn 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'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. On a side note, backticks are bad and you shouldn't use them. :P > 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.