I haven't been following this thread so forgive me if I repeat anything.
Along with standard file system permissioning, you may want to see if your file
system supports ACLs (man setfacl and getfacl for more info).
Also, if you use SSH, you can limit the server to CVS access only (see SSH docs
o
Hugo van der Merwe writes:
>
> Now I wonder, as any of those users can modify any file in this
> structure, is "trust" the only way I can stop them from messing with my
> other projects?
The way you have things currently set up, yes.
> (Must I create a second repository with different "group
>
On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 03:13:15PM -0400, Larry Jones wrote:
> Performance should be essentially the same in either case. ssh has a
> privacy/security advantage since the entire communication is strongly
> encrypted; pserver is somewhat easier to set up.
Having now started using my CVS reposit
Howard Zhou writes:
>
> To my understanding, pserver uses a service port via inetd or xinetd daemon
> service. Would this service port be a bottle neck to access to CVS
> repositories from multiple clients simultaneously?
No, that's how all services work. Multiple clients can connect to the
sam
19, 2001 12:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: pserver vs. ssh - performance
Hi, CVS Community,
To my understanding, pserver uses a service port via inetd or xinetd daemon
service. Would this service port be a bottle neck to access to CVS
repositories from multiple clients simultaneously?
How
Hi, CVS Community,
To my understanding, pserver uses a service port via inetd or xinetd daemon
service. Would this service port be a bottle neck to access to CVS
repositories from multiple clients simultaneously?
How is the performance with ssh access method compared to pserver mode? Can
someone
