On 04/15/05 11:42 Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
I really like Jay's 'sipup' :-). I don't think the name has to be similar to cvsup.
Well, we have httpup and cvsup, so svnup seemed the obvious choice to me ;)
I think it would be a good idea to have a binary name different than 'svn', to allow people to break they're svn ports (e.g. by using release candidates etc) without breaking port updates. I'd even go as far as to discourage users to use this binary for other svn checkouts (even though a light client only version of subversion would be a nice addition to the ports tree). 'svup' sounds friendly to me.
Yes, I'd also take an additional step and suggest people who already have the standard svn installed to use the dedicated tool anyway for port updates, this way: - there's no need to detect what's installed within the ports driver - standard tool == quicker identification of problems The port is ready, do you prefer a binary port or a source based one that uses the included libraries? (both produce a statically linked* svup binary). Regards, Simone * to a certain extent, since it requires a binary-compatible glibc version for some calls (i.e. dlopen) -- Simone Rota WEB : http://www.varlock.com Bergamo, Italy MAIL: sip@varlock.com