svn - but smaller?
Chris Rees
utisoft at gmail.com
Fri Jan 25 15:41:22 UTC 2013
On 25 Jan 2013 13:39, "Ian Smith" <smithi at nimnet.asn.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:57:17 -0800, 'Jeremy Chadwick' wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 06:34:33PM +1100, Dewayne wrote:
> > > The objective is to return to a base build of FreeBSD that performs
> > > the expected task of being able to pull source, without having to
> > > acquire a port. Regardless of our individual solutions/workarounds,
> > > the task is to pull and maintain source.
> > >
> > > Is the discussion going to result in something like svn-lite that
> > > enters into the /usr/src/contrib along with the responsibilities
> > > associated with maintaining it? And then we need to take into
> > > consideration of being overwriting the "base svn" with a full svn
> > > package, if required by the user/admin.
> [..]
> > > I build svn from ports with all options off except for:
> > > ENHANCED_KEYWORD P4_STYLE_MARKERS STATIC which results in a 4.2MB svn
> > > program. Suites me but doesn't address the underlying problem - and I
> > > don't think that the plan is to make FreeBSD dependent upon the ports
> > > system (for subversion)
>
> [..]
> > As for your last line:
> >
> > FreeBSD is already dependent upon Subversion. This has been the case
> > for quite some time, but has only recently (as an indirect result of
the
> > security incident) become forced upon users/administrators of FreeBSD.
> > The entire project is presently managed/maintained under Subversion.
> > The Handbook now documents that if you want to pull down src/ you need
> > to install Subversion. If you want to pull down ports/ you can use
> > portsnap and waste lots of /var space, hoping that the portsnap mirrors
> > are up to date, and a bunch of other hullabaloo... or you could just
use
> > Subversion and be done with it.
> >
> > There is no more cvsup. There is no more csup. There is no more cvs.
>
> I'm trying to work out exactly when support for checking out 9-STABLE
> CVS sources - and I'm only talking about system sources here - will end?
>
> Peter Wemm (cc'd) writes in https://wiki.freebsd.org/CvsIsDeprecated,
> last edited 2013-01-22:
>
> "3. For FreeBSD 9-stable, 8-stable and 7-stable, we will be attempting
> to continue updates through the exporter the official "support"
> end-of-life for last release on the branch at the time of writing
> (November 16th, 2012).
> * This means, updates will be maintained on a best effort
> basis until 9.0-RELEASE, 8.3-RELEASE, 7.4-RELEASE are no longer
> supported.
> * This notice pre-dates 9.1-RELEASE, and the release of 9.1
> will not extend the lifetime of RELENG_9 branch exporter.
> * This is not a commitment to operate the services, it will
> only be done on a best effort basis. If serious problems develop or
> usage dies down significantly we may accelerate its end-of-life."
>
> But after kerfuffle about 9.1-RELEASE branch sources not (then) being
> available via c{v,}sup, Bjoern Zeeb wrote on Sept 18th 2012 in
>
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2012-September/069600.html
> "RELENG_9_1 is now exported the CVS as well and will be for as long as
> things will be exported to CVS." Other posts around that time clearly
> said that CVS source access would remain for the lifetime of 9-STABLE.
>
> Could someone please clarify this situation?
>
> As others have suggested, an SVN package that could be installed with a
> static build and run dependency-free binary would help ease the pain for
> those looking specifically at updating 9.x or 8.x sources to -STABLE as
> a directly usable csup replacement, preferably on install media but at
> least easily fetchable as a package? I find portsnap fine for ports.
I've just created devel/subversion-static that will be available by pkg_add
once the package builds are back.
Chris
More information about the freebsd-stable
mailing list