> We've been using CVS with the repository exported via NFS to our UNIX boxen.
This seems to cause an undue amount of repository file corruption, and should be avoided. > now we need to connect to another cvs repo at a remote site and the only > access the want to give us is via wincvs with the repository on a mapped > drive. > What do you mean with the repository on a mapped drive? If it's at a remote site, use some sort of client-server system, either ssh or pserver depending on your needs. This should be much less intrusive than somehow NFS-mounting the drive from afar. > Now, just from discussion on this list I realise this is bad. My question is > what are the potential issues with this approach? I need a better answer than > "I've heard it's bad" to try and cut through the fog of developer inertia and > blinding stupidity we've got here, not that It'll help. > > Could someone explain to me the issues with mounting the repo via a network > filesystem? > In the first place, it exposes the repository to anything anybody might do to it, whereas client-server restricts what somebody can do to the repository while making a mistake. In the second place, it seems to cause data corruption. This is probably a case of locking problems, so that more than one server process will be working on the same directory without realizing it. -- Now building a CVS reference site at http://www.thornleyware.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
