Re: [Leaf-devel] Proposed change to shell devel tree
Mike Noyes wrote: Everyone, Here is a revised version of my previous post. We need to make some changes to our handling of individual developer content. We are running out of space on the shell server. SF only allocates a maximum of approximately 1G of space on the shell server. Our devel tree is currently using 772M. Proposed changes: Kernels shall only be provided in tarball format. This is a pain if someone only needs a module for e.g. a nic. This would require downloading 5M when you only need a 15k module. Perhaps obsolete kernels could be removed? Charles seems to have 186M of kernels/modules, and only the 2.2.19-3 kernel has all known security holes fixed, so the others shouldn't be used anyway. * space savings over individual files * tarballs only take a few minutes to download even at V.90 speeds Agreed, but IMHO it's still a waste of bandwidth. Archive developer directories on the shell server that haven't been updated within the last six months. A tarball of the developer's directory will be placed in our cvs repository. It shall reside in the developers personal devel tree in cvs. After the tarball is verified, the devel directory on the shell server will be removed. * reduce tech support questions about old files * developer directory can be restored from cvs * space savings on shell server Opinions, comments, and/or suggestions on this proposal are welcome. At your service! Ewald Wasscher ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] Proposed change to shell devel tree
At 2002-01-17 18:37 +0100, Ewald Wasscher wrote: Mike Noyes wrote: Here is a revised version of my previous post. We need to make some changes to our handling of individual developer content. We are running out of space on the shell server. SF only allocates a maximum of approximately 1G of space on the shell server. Our devel tree is currently using 772M. Proposed changes: Kernels shall only be provided in tarball format. This is a pain if someone only needs a module for e.g. a nic. This would require downloading 5M when you only need a 15k module. Perhaps obsolete kernels could be removed? Charles seems to have 186M of kernels/modules, and only the 2.2.19-3 kernel has all known security holes fixed, so the others shouldn't be used anyway. Ewald, Thanks for the feedback. :-) I thought about your suggestion, and I agree that some of the older content could be removed. It is available from our files area [1], so the content in the devel tree on the shell server is redundant. However, your suggestion is harder to use as a policy. I believe there are differing opinions as to what current means for a kernel. Am I mistaken? Developers can always place expanded kernels in their personal tree [2] in our cvs repository. Binary files should download properly from ViewCVS provided the -kb sticky tags are set. So, single module downloads would still be possible. [1] http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=13751 [2] http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/leaf/devel/ -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://leaf.sourceforge.net/ ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] Proposed change to shell devel tree
Everyone, Here is a revised version of my previous post. We need to make some changes to our handling of individual developer content. We are running out of space on the shell server. SF only allocates a maximum of approximately 1G of space on the shell server. Our devel tree is currently using 772M. Proposed changes: Kernels shall only be provided in tarball format. * space savings over individual files * tarballs only take a few minutes to download even at V.90 speeds Archive developer directories on the shell server that haven't been updated within the last six months. A tarball of the developer's directory will be placed in our cvs repository. It shall reside in the developers personal devel tree in cvs. After the tarball is verified, the devel directory on the shell server will be removed. * reduce tech support questions about old files * developer directory can be restored from cvs * space savings on shell server Opinions, comments, and/or suggestions on this proposal are welcome. -- Mike Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://leaf.sourceforge.net/ ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
