On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Diane Bruce wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:45:23PM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> >
> > On 2013-10-07, at 2:53 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
> >
> > > Or do you really only run the base OS and no other software on your
> systems, without any of your own code or
Glen Barber wrote this message on Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 20:59 -0400:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:54:23PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> > > No, not really.
> > >
> > > # mkdir local
> > > # svnadmin create ./local
> > > # svn import /etc file:///$PWD/local
> >
> > besides the s/svn/
On 2013-10-07, at 6:05 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> I don't see any discussion as to why the code (CVS, in this case) *needs* to
> be removed.
My stupidity: I meant RCS, not CVS.
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 10/07/13 18:37, Adam Vande More wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Adam Vande More
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I would like to see RCS remain in base as well. Many enterprise
>> distro still ship it by default too. There is no compelling
>> reason
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Adam Vande More wrote:
>
> I would like to see RCS remain in base as well. Many enterprise distro
> still ship it by default too. There is no compelling reason to remove it.
>
I sort of retract that statement. I thought the base RCS was already
OpenRCS. I suppo
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 10/8/13 9:05 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>
>> On 2013-10-07, at 5:58 PM, Ian Lepore wrote:
>>
>> I have not re-read those threads to see just how much of the discussion
>>> involved rcs, I just spot-checked a few and confirmed my memor
On 10/8/13 9:05 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
On 2013-10-07, at 5:58 PM, Ian Lepore wrote:
I have not re-read those threads to see just how much of the discussion
involved rcs, I just spot-checked a few and confirmed my memory that it
showed up in some of the messages there.
I don't see any dis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 10/07/13 17:42, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:36:42PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
So there's no version control in the base at all now?.. When
did FreeBSD decide to move away from distributing a usable
OS? Why n
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:03:44AM +0100, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
> On 8 October 2013 01:59, Glen Barber wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:54:23PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> >
>
> [snip]
>
>
> > > Plus, I was quite reasured that svn isn't smart enough to realize that
> > > a path mi
On 2013-10-07, at 5:58 PM, Ian Lepore wrote:
> I have not re-read those threads to see just how much of the discussion
> involved rcs, I just spot-checked a few and confirmed my memory that it
> showed up in some of the messages there.
I don't see any discussion as to why the code (CVS, in this
On 8 October 2013 01:59, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:54:23PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
>
[snip]
> > Plus, I was quite reasured that svn isn't smart enough to realize that
> > a path might be a file: url relative to the current working directory...
>
> I don't know what
On 8 October 2013 01:58, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-10-07 at 16:49 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > I've asked on IRC to figure out when this was first proposed. I'll see if
> > it was announced anywhere or if Eitan snuck it in.
> >
> >
> > -a
>
> It was mentioned briefly on stable@
>
> http:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:54:23PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> > No, not really.
> >
> > # mkdir local
> > # svnadmin create ./local
> > # svn import /etc file:///$PWD/local
>
> besides the s/svn/svnlite/ you forgot... It doesn't work... Sure it
WITH_SVN in src.conf will insta
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > > Or do you really only run the base OS and no other software on your
> > > systems, without any of your own code or any customisation?
> > We install from the base release ISO images burned on DVDs.
> >
> > We are physically air-gapped from the inte
On Mon, 2013-10-07 at 16:49 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> I've asked on IRC to figure out when this was first proposed. I'll see if
> it was announced anywhere or if Eitan snuck it in.
>
>
> -a
It was mentioned briefly on stable@
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2012-August/0692
Glen Barber wrote this message on Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 20:42 -0400:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:36:42PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> > > > So there's no version control in the base at all now?.. When did FreeBSD
> > > > decide to move away from distributing a usable OS? Why not just
> > > > d
On 2013-10-07, at 5:40 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
>> svnlite?
>>
> fail
I won't go that far, immediately.
But I need a tool that lets me migrate the history of my RCS files to the new
regime.
And the new tools(s) *must* be part of the base system. (Migration tools
included.)
And the new
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 05:36:42PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> > > So there's no version control in the base at all now?.. When did FreeBSD
> > > decide to move away from distributing a usable OS? Why not just distribute
> > > a kernel and a few bits that are barely sufficient for the initial
On 10/8/13 5:29 AM, Glen Barber wrote:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:26:07PM +0100, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
On 7 October 2013 22:15, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
Well, it has been announced, and is available as a port.
So there's no version control in the base at all now?.. When did FreeBSD
decide t
Glen Barber wrote this message on Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 17:29 -0400:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:26:07PM +0100, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
> > On 7 October 2013 22:15, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Well, it has been announced, and is available as a port.
> > >
> >
> > So there's no version c
On 8 October 2013 01:00, Adrian Chadd wrote:
[snip]
Oh, I know it's an up-hill battle. But I honestly thought that this had
> been communicated on a list somewhere. It seems.. not. I don't know why.
> Gah.
It's been communicated at Sun, 6 Oct 2013 22:43:21 -0400, but that doesn't
meed there's
On 10/8/13 6:45 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
On 2013-10-07, at 2:53 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
Or do you really only run the base OS and no other software on your systems,
without any of your own code or any customisation?
We install from the base release ISO images burned on DVDs.
We are phy
On 7 October 2013 16:58, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>
> On 2013-10-07, at 4:49 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
> > I've asked on IRC to figure out when this was first proposed.
>
> Adrian, something to keep in mind is that the majority of your code's
> users will never use your preferred communication me
On 2013-10-07, at 4:49 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> I've asked on IRC to figure out when this was first proposed.
Adrian, something to keep in mind is that the majority of your code's users
will never use your preferred communication media. So when you propose to
remove a feature, absence of pu
I've asked on IRC to figure out when this was first proposed. I'll see if
it was announced anywhere or if Eitan snuck it in.
-a
On 7 October 2013 16:46, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 10/8/13 7:37 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Then you and others should stand up and provide feedback lik
On 10/8/13 7:37 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Hi!
Then you and others should stand up and provide feedback like this far, far
earlier in the development process.
Adiran this is the first I've heard of removing RCS.
I would have screamed about it had I heard anything..
so now that I officially regi
On 2013-10-07, at 4:37 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Then you and others should stand up and provide feedback like this far, far
> earlier in the development process.
So when was this first discussed? I've been on -current for over a decade. If
I missed a prior discussion I truly apologize.
--
Hi!
Then you and others should stand up and provide feedback like this far, far
earlier in the development process.
If everyone who communicates says "x" and no-one says anything about the
other letters "a"->"w", "y", "z", then we as developers don't really have a
good cross-section of what peopl
On 2013-10-07, at 3:45 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> Having RCS in the base system is very useful. We use it to track changes to
> bits of /etc on the machines where we don't do wholesale customizations.
> (Those ones get git, but they also get an install of /usr/ports with a fully
> popula
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:45:23PM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>
> On 2013-10-07, at 2:53 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
>
> > Or do you really only run the base OS and no other software on your
> > systems, without any of your own code or any customisation?
>
> We install from the base release
On 2013-10-07, at 2:53 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
> Or do you really only run the base OS and no other software on your systems,
> without any of your own code or any customisation?
We install from the base release ISO images burned on DVDs.
We are physically air-gapped from the internet, none
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
> On 7 October 2013 22:28, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
>
> svnlite? :)
> >
>
> Thanks Lev & Glen- it's something to explore albeit that screws up quite a
> lot of stuff on this end...
>
Why does that screw up anything? Just include the RCS pack
.. don't be surprised how many people do exactly this; then compile what
handful of things they need from source in order to make a server.
-adrian
On 7 October 2013 14:53, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 7 Oct 2013, at 22:14, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>
> > "Install from ports" is a non-starter.
On 7 Oct 2013, at 22:14, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> "Install from ports" is a non-starter. Our development systems will never be
> connected to the internet for a ports upgrade. In this environment, in-base
> RCS is a very useful tool.
Why is install from packages any harder than installing t
On 7 October 2013 22:28, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
svnlite? :)
>
Thanks Lev & Glen- it's something to explore albeit that screws up quite a
lot of stuff on this end...
Cheers,
--
Igor M.
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebs
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:26:07PM +0100, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
> On 7 October 2013 22:15, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
>
>
> > Well, it has been announced, and is available as a port.
> >
>
> So there's no version control in the base at all now?.. When did FreeBSD
> decide to move away from distrib
Hello, Igor.
You wrote 8 октября 2013 г., 1:26:07:
>> Well, it has been announced, and is available as a port.
IM> So there's no version control in the base at all now?.. When did FreeBSD
IM> decide to move away from distributing a usable OS? Why not just distribute
IM> a kernel and a few bits tha
On 7 October 2013 22:15, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
> Well, it has been announced, and is available as a port.
>
So there's no version control in the base at all now?.. When did FreeBSD
decide to move away from distributing a usable OS? Why not just distribute
a kernel and a few bits that are barel
On 10/7/13 2:14 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
On 2013-10-07, at 2:08 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
And sorry, what I left out was how having ci/co in the base is immensely
helpful with the installer scripts I write. The server installation scripts
I've cooked up use ci(1) to keep a record of ch
On 2013-10-07, at 2:08 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> And sorry, what I left out was how having ci/co in the base is immensely
> helpful with the installer scripts I write. The server installation scripts
> I've cooked up use ci(1) to keep a record of changes made during the
> (possibly custo
On 7 October 2013 22:08, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>
> On 2013-10-07, at 2:02 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>
> > I use ci/co every single day to track changes to individual config files
> on individual machines. For simple things like ntp.conf, rc.conf,
> sysctl.conf, a simple 'ci -l xxx' is a tri
On 2013-10-07, at 2:02 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> I use ci/co every single day to track changes to individual config files on
> individual machines. For simple things like ntp.conf, rc.conf, sysctl.conf,
> a simple 'ci -l xxx' is a trivial way to maintain local revision control.
And sorry
I know I am a certified crank, but ... why? This is some of the simplest code
on the planet. Is it broken by recent OS releases? I use ci/co every single
day to track changes to individual config files on individual machines. For
simple things like ntp.conf, rc.conf, sysctl.conf, a simple 'c
43 matches
Mail list logo
