On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 12:15:08PM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
>
> I knew it when I did it. But I preferred what you see above better than
> File-System-based, FS-based and worst of all, File System-based.
What about FSFS-based?
> I thought about that also, but I could not figure out what would happen
> by not building the BDB library, and then trying to access a BDB-based
> repo out in the world somewhere. If you know that it doesn't matter,
> without doubt, of course that would be the best scenario.
>From INSTALL:
Berkeley DB is needed to build a Subversion server that supports
the bdb repository filesystem, or to access a bdb repository on
local disk. If you will only use the fsfs repository filesystem,
or if you are building a Subversion client that will only speak
to remote (networked) repositories, you don't need it.
So basically, if you build a bdb-based repo and want to access it
locally, you already have a bdb-based client (it's the same binary that
created the repo). We warn against building a bdb-based repo, and since
you don't need bdb support to access a remote bdb repo, bdb can be
removed from the equation altogether.
--
Archaic
Want control, education, and security from your operating system?
Hardened Linux From Scratch
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-book
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
