FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Build System

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-22-2008, 02:35 AM
Jason L Tibbitts III
 
Default fun with CVS branching

>>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> writes:

BN> So, the question would be... is this worth it? Do we want to keep
BN> supporting this?

I can't see how it's all that useful. And given that this is the kind
of weirdness that's going to be difficult to emulate using some other
version control system, getting rid of it now could make it easier to
switch to something else in the future.

- J<

--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
 
Old 04-22-2008, 03:15 AM
Toshio Kuratomi
 
Default fun with CVS branching

Bill Nottingham wrote:

Two things from this mass branching that showed up:

1) Something weird happened, and all the modules entries pw*-z
got deleted from the modules file halfway through. We get to try
and put them back. Um, yay?

2) The modules file, *as it stands now*, is nearly 3MB checked out,
and nearly *1.2GB* under RCS. That can't be good.

The reason for this is to allow for the creation of pseudo-modules
for each 'branch', i.e., so 'cvs co FC-5' generates a:

FC-5/bash
FC-5/automake
FC-5/autoconf
...

tree, where the FC-5/<package> directory is the 'normal' <package>/FC-5
dir.

(Note that the 'devel' meta-branch is done in an Entirely Different
manner.)

So, the question would be... is this worth it? Do we want to keep
supporting this?


I'd say no but I've never used this feature at all.

-Toshio

--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
 
Old 04-22-2008, 05:48 AM
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams
 
Default fun with CVS branching

On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 22:19 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> So, the question would be... is this worth it? Do we want to keep
> supporting this?

Is the fact that you can check out e.g. "FC-5" even *documented*
anywhere? I don't recall having come across it, but then again I am a
skimmer.

--
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet@gmail.com>

PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed
--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
 
Old 04-22-2008, 06:42 AM
Christian Iseli
 
Default fun with CVS branching

On 21 Apr 2008 21:35:01 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> writes:
>
> BN> So, the question would be... is this worth it? Do we want to keep
> BN> supporting this?
>
> I can't see how it's all that useful. And given that this is the kind
> of weirdness that's going to be difficult to emulate using some other
> version control system, getting rid of it now could make it easier to
> switch to something else in the future.

Agreed. Take it out back and...

Cheers,
Christian

--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
 
Old 04-22-2008, 09:59 AM
Michael Schwendt
 
Default fun with CVS branching

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:48:48 -0400, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:

> On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 22:19 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > So, the question would be... is this worth it? Do we want to keep
> > supporting this?
>
> Is the fact that you can check out e.g. "FC-5" even *documented*
> anywhere? I don't recall having come across it, but then again I am a
> skimmer.

The generic "cvs co BRANCH" was documented and used during the FE era.
It's a matter of convenience. It was quick access to a specific branch
without the need to filter package branch dirs [with a little bit extra
work in scripts]. But all I remember is that the modules file was broken
often and needed fixes before a full branch could be checked out.
Nowadays, cvs contents are so huge, one better avoids checking out
complete branches. One is better of to download the seed file and up
from there.

--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
 
Old 04-22-2008, 02:02 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default fun with CVS branching

On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 22:19 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> 1) Something weird happened, and all the modules entries pw*-z
> got deleted from the modules file halfway through. We get to try
> and put them back. Um, yay?

The branching is done now, any smooth thoughts on how to recover this
before I turn CVS commits back on?

>
> 2) The modules file, *as it stands now*, is nearly 3MB checked out,
> and nearly *1.2GB* under RCS. That can't be good.
>
> The reason for this is to allow for the creation of pseudo-modules
> for each 'branch', i.e., so 'cvs co FC-5' generates a:
>
> FC-5/bash
> FC-5/automake
> FC-5/autoconf
> ...
>
> tree, where the FC-5/<package> directory is the 'normal'
> <package>/FC-5
> dir.
>
> (Note that the 'devel' meta-branch is done in an Entirely Different
> manner.)
>
> So, the question would be... is this worth it? Do we want to keep
> supporting this?

No, get rid of it.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
 
Old 04-24-2008, 11:39 AM
Dave Jones
 
Default fun with CVS branching

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 10:19:40PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Two things from this mass branching that showed up:
>
> 1) Something weird happened, and all the modules entries pw*-z
> got deleted from the modules file halfway through. We get to try
> and put them back. Um, yay?
>
> 2) The modules file, *as it stands now*, is nearly 3MB checked out,
> and nearly *1.2GB* under RCS. That can't be good.
>
> The reason for this is to allow for the creation of pseudo-modules
> for each 'branch', i.e., so 'cvs co FC-5' generates a:
>
> FC-5/bash
> FC-5/automake
> FC-5/autoconf
> ...
>
> tree, where the FC-5/<package> directory is the 'normal' <package>/FC-5
> dir.
>
> (Note that the 'devel' meta-branch is done in an Entirely Different
> manner.)
>
> So, the question would be... is this worth it? Do we want to keep
> supporting this?

I find it handy to check out the entirity of devel/, but the older
releases I couldn't care less about. I can't imagine why someone
would want the entire package CVS of an older release unless they
were looking for something tree-wide, which few peope are loony
enough to want to do.

Dave

--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
 
Old 04-24-2008, 03:43 PM
Orion Poplawski
 
Default fun with CVS branching

Dave Jones wrote:

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 10:19:40PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> So, the question would be... is this worth it? Do we want to keep
> supporting this?

I find it handy to check out the entirity of devel/, but the older
releases I couldn't care less about.



I'm with Dave here. I keep devel/ checked out so I can grep for
BuildRequires and the like. I would really like to just be able to
checkout all the spec files - don't care about the patches, etc.



--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane orion@cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com

--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
 
Old 04-24-2008, 04:42 PM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default fun with CVS branching

Orion Poplawski (orion@cora.nwra.com) said:
>> I find it handy to check out the entirity of devel/, but the older
>> releases I couldn't care less about.
>
> I'm with Dave here. I keep devel/ checked out so I can grep for
> BuildRequires and the like. I would really like to just be able to
> checkout all the spec files - don't care about the patches, etc.

As stated in the original mail, 'devel' still works, as it's done
in a different manner.

Bill

--
Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list
Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:36 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org