At 10:15 PM 2/10/00 -0800, John Polstra wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Jeffrey J. Mountin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> In the context of CVSup server connections it would not be. Have to
>> chuckle when I hear someone doing CVSup for ports-all. Unless they have a
>> reason, but as we know many will do man things blindly.
>
>In my experience, CVSup is not slow for the ports tree. CVS is slow,
>but not CVSup. I can typically update my entire CVS repository
>(CVSROOT + distrib + doc + ports + src + www) in 1.5-2 minutes on a
>56 Kbit link. Of course the "cvs upd" afterwards does take a long time.
Yes, the CVSup "client" it is quick, even with a 33.6K modem to my surprise
(not sure if I'll go back to ISDN or get ADSL). Don't use CVS too often.
Was thinking more about all the extra work that the servers are doing in
light of your request to spread the load around. Reducing the size of the
initial distrubution and explaining the wonders of refuse files to trim
down the port tree are my main gist. Less to look at, clean out, refuse,
and serve. Or just sit there collecting dust.
I'm more than happy with how the ports and CVSup work for me, but think it
could be made better to help new users.
Matt's idea or something similar that is self-contained sounds like the way
to go for the future. And at a guess would not take too much hackery for
the install. Something
BTW, other than a few odd quirks a few months back have not seen any
connections hanging. Transient poltergeist perhaps. <shrug>
Jeff Mountin - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems/Network Administrator
FreeBSD - the power to serve
'86 Yamaha MaxiumX (not FBSD powered)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
