[clc-devel] cvs anonymous access
hi all, here at CRUX PPC we have troubles with cvsup/cm3 (the only modula3 compiler that works on PPC_LINUX) on systems with newer glibc (nptl). i'm writing a "driver" for "ports" that uses the normal cvs client to sync the local repository with the remote files instead of cvsup... seems it works well. it require an anonymous access to the cvs server, we're testing it for PPC base and opt ports collection from the sunsite's cvs server. we have in mind to include it in the upcoming CRUX PPC 2.0 release instead of cvsup, so can we have an anonymous access to the CLC ports repository? cptn on freenode has told to me that you're using cvs on ssh, it's not a problem, we can work on the "driver" to works throught ssh. thank you, regards -- Giulivo Navigante GnuPG KeyID: E468396A
Hi, On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 21:17:56 +0200, Giulivo Navigante wrote:
hi all, here at CRUX PPC we have troubles with cvsup/cm3 (the only modula3 compiler that works on PPC_LINUX) on systems with newer glibc (nptl).
i'm writing a "driver" for "ports" that uses the normal cvs client to sync the local repository with the remote files instead of cvsup... seems it works well. it require an anonymous access to the cvs server, we're testing it for PPC base and opt ports collection from the sunsite's cvs server.
we have in mind to include it in the upcoming CRUX PPC 2.0 release instead of cvsup, so can we have an anonymous access to the CLC ports repository? Sorry I didn't bring that up in IRC, but why do you switch away from httpup? I mean 'cvs update' transmits complete files as well (of course clients can request compression, but still), so it's similar in terms of netwerk load. I don't mean to advertise httpup, just interested in the reason your switching.
Another thing I was wondering about is whether it makes sense to make PPC users use the tree from CLC which is only tested on x86. Wouldn't it be better to have your own repository, and sync it with the CLC tree if this is wanted, including PPC specific changes and fixes?
cptn on freenode has told to me that you're using cvs on ssh, it's not a problem, we can work on the "driver" to works throught ssh. AFAICS if Martin allows anonymous access to the CVS, it won't be through ssh (since the anonymous user would require a user account on this machine then).
Best regards, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
On 06/16/04 21:57:35, Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Sorry I didn't bring that up in IRC, but why do you switch away from httpup? I mean 'cvs update' transmits complete files as well (of course clients can request compression, but still), so it's similar in terms of netwerk load. I don't mean to advertise httpup, just interested in the reason your switching.
for base/opt collections we have to maintain the httpup REPO... the cvs wrapper does not require ftp/http space and overload to syncs is with the cvs tree.
Another thing I was wondering about is whether it makes sense to make PPC users use the tree from CLC which is only tested on x86.
most of the clc's ports works well on ppc too and they are a foundamentally resource for CRUX distro
Wouldn't it be better to have your own repository, and sync it with the CLC tree if this is wanted, including PPC specific changes and fixes?
sometime ago we have proposed a little hack to pkgutils to have only one main cvs repository and a technique to pass only the differences to the PPC clients... but no one has approved :(
AFAICS if Martin allows anonymous access to the CVS, it won't be through ssh (since the anonymous user would require a user account on this machine then).
i hope he can do that :) greetings -- Giulivo Navigante GnuPG KeyID: E468396A
Hi, On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 00:38:12 +0200, Giulivo Navigante wrote:
On 06/16/04 21:57:35, Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Sorry I didn't bring that up in IRC, but why do you switch away from httpup? I mean 'cvs update' transmits complete files as well (of course clients can request compression, but still), so it's similar in terms of netwerk load. I don't mean to advertise httpup, just interested in the reason your switching.
for base/opt collections we have to maintain the httpup REPO... the cvs wrapper does not require ftp/http space and overload to syncs is with the cvs tree. Well, both http space and network load are on the CLC server, right? We have httpup repositories anyway, so there's no additional load on your side. Even more, the CVS traffic will be on our side as well, so it basically boils down that we either offer ports to users using the httpup service we already have, or an additional, less secure [1] way (anonymous cvs) we had to implement anew. There's no visible difference to the user (besides the CVS directories in the ports tree when using the CVS service).
Or am I missing something fundamental here? Kind regards, Johannes References. 1. http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/192038 -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
On 06/17/04 11:04:01, Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Hi,
Well, both http space and network load are on the CLC server, right?
yep
We have httpup repositories anyway, so there's no additional load on your side.
yep [cut]
Or am I missing something fundamental here?
httpup (at client side) is perfect for the clc ports, not for cruxppc base and opt collections... the wrapper is intented for our ports :) so, the users of cruxppc should install also httpup and curl to access clc ports? the cruxppc iso image should include also httpup and curl? we are debating about an anonyous cvs access! who is requesting is a damn cruxppc developer not only a crux user! uff... no pkgutils hack, no repositories merge, no anonymous access, no gnu/linux, no crux-evolution select crux as favourite distro is more difficult every day :( -- Giulivo Navigante GnuPG KeyID: E468396A
Hi Giulivo, On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 15:05:36 +0200, Giulivo Navigante wrote:
On 06/17/04 11:04:01, Johannes Winkelmann wrote: [...]
Or am I missing something fundamental here?
httpup (at client side) is perfect for the clc ports, not for cruxppc base and opt collections... the wrapper is intented for our ports :)
so, the users of cruxppc should install also httpup and curl to access clc ports? the cruxppc iso image should include also httpup and curl? I can't see a problem with this.
we are debating about an anonyous cvs access! who is requesting is a damn cruxppc developer not only a crux user! uff... no pkgutils hack, no repositories merge, no anonymous access, no gnu/linux, no crux-evolution Giulivo, I'm asking you to calm down and try to be rational here. If you are not interested in a solution, feel free to write e-mails like this. It might be just my impression, but unless you learn to discuss problems in a reasonable way, you won't have any success in getting help from others here.
Kind regards, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net
participants (2)
-
Giulivo Navigante -
Johannes Winkelmann