[parisc-linux] CVS checkouts on ftp server

[parisc-linux] CVS checkouts on ftp server

[Andrew Shugg]

I was trawling through ftp.parisc-linux.org/cvs looking for a tarball of
the linux-2.5 tree and couldn't see anything, apart from a /cvs/2.5
directory (which is currently empty).

Is there enough disk space to do a linux-2.5 tarball for the FTP server?

Also the /cvs directory contains a few files that look like stuff-ups
from the CVS tarball roller: linux-.tar.gz and patch-.diff.gz ...

Andrew.

-- 
Andrew Shugg <andrew@neep.com.au>                   http://www.neep.com.au/

"Just remember, Mr Fawlty, there's always someone worse off than yourself."
"Is there?  Well I'd like to meet him.  I could do with a good laugh."

Re: [parisc-linux] CVS checkouts on ftp server

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 12:21:23PM +0800, Andrew Shugg wrote:
> I was trawling through ftp.parisc-linux.org/cvs looking for a tarball of
> the linux-2.5 tree and couldn't see anything, apart from a /cvs/2.5
> directory (which is currently empty).

Those aren't currently being generated (AFAIK).  What _is_ being generated
are the patches against upstream: http://ftp.parisc-linux.org/2.5/kernel-src/

> Is there enough disk space to do a linux-2.5 tarball for the FTP server?

Yes, certainly.  Do you still want that, given the existance of these
patches?

> Also the /cvs directory contains a few files that look like stuff-ups
> from the CVS tarball roller: linux-.tar.gz and patch-.diff.gz ...

I can see them... but I can also see the CVS scripts are still running.
Possibly they'll be renamed later.

-- 
"It's not Hollywood.  War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or
victory, it is about death.  I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies.
Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk

Re: [parisc-linux] CVS checkouts on ftp server

[Andrew Shugg]

Matthew Wilcox said:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 12:21:23PM +0800, Andrew Shugg wrote:
> > I was trawling through ftp.parisc-linux.org/cvs looking for a tarball of
> > the linux-2.5 tree and couldn't see anything, apart from a /cvs/2.5
> > directory (which is currently empty).
> 
> Those aren't currently being generated (AFAIK).  What _is_ being generated
> are the patches against upstream: http://ftp.parisc-linux.org/2.5/kernel-src/

Ah yes, I saw those.  But then I'll need to make a vanilla Linus tree,
and I am lazy.  I mean, streamlined and efficient.  =)

> > Is there enough disk space to do a linux-2.5 tarball for the FTP server?
> 
> Yes, certainly.  Do you still want that, given the existance of these
> patches?

It'd be nice.  Yes, I'd like it, if it's not a problem for anyone.
Otherwise I'll try the above method, or slowly drag it out of CVS.  I'm
assuming that occasional linux-2.5 tarballs might be useful for people
other than me of course ...

> > Also the /cvs directory contains a few files that look like stuff-ups
> > from the CVS tarball roller: linux-.tar.gz and patch-.diff.gz ...
> 
> I can see them... but I can also see the CVS scripts are still running.
> Possibly they'll be renamed later.

Doesn't seem to be; they're empty files (though > 0 bytes from gzip).  I
think the checkout script is using an empty variable, eg linux-$i.tar.gz
or whatever.  The 'latest' softlinks are to these empty files.  I can't
see any likely-looking tarball-rolling scripts in CVSROOT/ so I'm unable
to investigate further.

Andrew.

-- 
Andrew Shugg <andrew@neep.com.au>                   http://www.neep.com.au/

"Just remember, Mr Fawlty, there's always someone worse off than yourself."
"Is there?  Well I'd like to meet him.  I could do with a good laugh."

Re: [parisc-linux] CVS checkouts on ftp server

[Paul Bame]

> > Those aren't currently being generated (AFAIK).  What _is_ being generated
> > are the patches against upstream: http://ftp.parisc-linux.org/2.5/kernel-sr
> c/
> 
> Ah yes, I saw those.  But then I'll need to make a vanilla Linus tree,
> and I am lazy.  I mean, streamlined and efficient.  =)

One reason I didn't bother with tarballs for 2.5 is it appears from
my limited sample that the tradition is per-arch patches -- and it makes
us appear to be more part of linux development rather than our own thing.

I also find that on slow links, I'm more likely to have a Linus kernel
tree somewhere nearby (perhaps on my x86 box) so only have to wait through
transferring the patch.  Less likely with 2.5 of course since it's changing
fast.

> It'd be nice.  Yes, I'd like it, if it's not a problem for anyone.
> Otherwise I'll try the above method, or slowly drag it out of CVS.  I'm
> assuming that occasional linux-2.5 tarballs might be useful for people
> other than me of course ...

Nobody else has asked.  I just posted a 2.5 tarball in the 2.5 patches
directory, which can then be kept up to date with CVS or with the
incremental patches.

> > > Also the /cvs directory contains a few files that look like stuff-ups
> > > from the CVS tarball roller: linux-.tar.gz and patch-.diff.gz ...
> > 
> > I can see them... but I can also see the CVS scripts are still running.
> > Possibly they'll be renamed later.
> 
> Doesn't seem to be; they're empty files (though > 0 bytes from gzip).  I
> think the checkout script is using an empty variable, eg linux-$i.tar.gz
> or whatever.  The 'latest' softlinks are to these empty files.  I can't
> see any likely-looking tarball-rolling scripts in CVSROOT/ so I'm unable
> to investigate further.

Nothing was obviously wrong with the script or log so I'm kicking it
off again.

	-P