Hi Charles,
> You don't understand how subversion works.
I never claimed otherwise ;-)
> It's like a file-system and
> making a tag or branch is like copying a directory. Everything
> underneath is copied too.
Well, to me, the way things are stored in the backend are pretty much
meaningless (l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin Hejl wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
>> This might be one benefit to subversion.
> It might be (I don't know, I've not used subversion so far). But the
> problem I see for buildtool is not so much that it's too hard to fetch a
> file for a specific bran
Hi Charles,
> This might be one benefit to subversion.
It might be (I don't know, I've not used subversion so far). But the
problem I see for buildtool is not so much that it's too hard to fetch a
file for a specific branch, but rather that buildtool currently isn't
fetching anything other than HE
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin Hejl wrote:
> Eric Spakman wrote:
>> There currently aren't any release tags unfortuanatly. But everything in
>> CVS is exactly 2.4.1, so if you build buildenv you would have version
>> 2.4.1.
> Just to clarify - the main reason that there relea
Martin Hejl wrote:
> Hi Erich,
>
>
>>Thanks for the clarification. The release tags would not hurt though.
>
> Sure.
>
>
>>>When making a checkout from CVS, remember to use a SF developer account
>>>- synching between the "real" CVS server and the backup server (which is
>>>used for anonymous
Hi Erich,
> Thanks for the clarification. The release tags would not hurt though.
Sure.
>> When making a checkout from CVS, remember to use a SF developer account
>> - synching between the "real" CVS server and the backup server (which is
>> used for anonymous access) still doesn't seem to work (
Martin
Martin Hejl wrote:
> Eric Spakman wrote:
>
>>There currently aren't any release tags unfortuanatly. But everything in
>>CVS is exactly 2.4.1, so if you build buildenv you would have version
>>2.4.1.
>
> Just to clarify - the main reason that there releases aren't tagged in
> CVS was not s
Eric Spakman wrote:
> There currently aren't any release tags unfortuanatly. But everything in
> CVS is exactly 2.4.1, so if you build buildenv you would have version
> 2.4.1.
Just to clarify - the main reason that there releases aren't tagged in
CVS was not simply because of oversight, but becaus
Hello Erich,
>> That's what I meant ;-)
>> If that option is removed, the initrd can also made smaller, because
>> the code needed to backup (mkfs.minix) can be removed.
>
> I believe this would be the best solution. I have no problem custom
> tailoring my initrd, but for the average user it might
Hi Eric
Eric Spakman wrote:
> Hi Erich,
>
>
>>>The question is, how useful is it to backup initrd? Life could be
>>>made very easy when the option to backup initrd is removed. There are
>>>different initrd packages which makes booting of of most systems
>>>possible (floppy, usb, cdrom and hd)
Hi Erich,
>> The question is, how useful is it to backup initrd? Life could be
>> made very easy when the option to backup initrd is removed. There are
>> different initrd packages which makes booting of of most systems
>> possible (floppy, usb, cdrom and hd) and if anything is missing a new
>
11 matches
Mail list logo
