[clc-devel] clc ports and crux ppc

Daniel Mueller danm at gmx.li
Fri Jul 23 18:01:47 UTC 2004

Hello Fergus,

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:33:40 +0200
ncrfgs <ncrfgs at tin.it> wrote:

> I hope other members don't think the same way. =)

Oh, I've seen some conversations of you and I'm not sure whether you
both are good _team_players. And it's not because of the language - I'm
a non-native english speaker as well (so I know the problem of 'How can
I say/explain that' ;-)

However, the more I'm thinking about the more I'm against a cvs based

- it's fault-prone because of (VERY!) complicated cvs handling
- it's too much work because of missing features in cvs

How many ports actually need to be changed for PPC ? I would say a
httpup-based solution would be better/easier to maintain. 
As you have to adjust (x86-)clc ports, a tool like mppm[1] might be a
good helper here.

> > Sometimes
> > it almost seems to me that they are not interested in CLC (as a
> > project) itself, but just having our ports.
> If it was so we would simply add the clc.cvsup to /etc/ports/ and we 
> wouldn't have asked to join and we wouldn't, for example, have
> reported any bug to the tracker.

I've seen that your default crux-ppc cd image comes with 'httpup' and

In this case it's pretty easy to distribute a *.httpup file and just
copy it into /etc/ports/. You don't need to run a cvsup daemon - all you
have to do is to publish ppc-specific ports via web. By using a tool
like prt-get(8) both port repositories (clc and ppc) could coexist -
without any interferences.

bye, danm

[1] http://jw.tks6.net/files/crux/mppm.html
Daniel Mueller
Berlin, Germany		(OpenPGP:  1024D/126EC290)

More information about the crux-devel mailing list