[U-Boot-Users] u-boot source - cvs versus git

[U-Boot-Users] u-boot source - cvs versus git

[Andrew Wozniak]

Hi,

I understand that U-Boot development and source is now management using 
"git". Since the cvs tree does seem to be pretty recent, is it ok to 
pull the latest U-Boot source from the cvs tree?  Or is there less risk 
of missing important code patches by using git?

After several failures at building git for my RH7.2 system, I decided to 
go back to using cvs - it just works!

-Andrew

[U-Boot-Users] u-boot source - cvs versus git

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <437BBA6A.7080708@mc.com> you wrote:
> 
> I understand that U-Boot development and source is now management using 
> "git". Since the cvs tree does seem to be pretty recent, is it ok to 

The git and CVS trees are 100% in sync. All commits on the  git  tree
have been checked in in parallel on the CVS tree, too.

Perhaps you might be so kind as to elucidate why you  think  the  CVS
tree might not be up to date?

> pull the latest U-Boot source from the cvs tree?  Or is there less risk 
> of missing important code patches by using git?

The code is exactly the same.

> After several failures at building git for my RH7.2 system, I decided to 
> go back to using cvs - it just works!

Ummm.. RH7.2 is pretty old, with a list of known andunfixed exploits.
If I were you I would consider to update my development  host  system
insted.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
"Everybody is talking about the  weather  but  nobody  does  anything
about it."                                               - Mark Twain

[U-Boot-Users] u-boot source - cvs versus git

[Andrew Wozniak]

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <437BBA6A.7080708@mc.com> you wrote:
>> I understand that U-Boot development and source is now management using 
>> "git". Since the cvs tree does seem to be pretty recent, is it ok to 
> 
> The git and CVS trees are 100% in sync. All commits on the  git  tree
> have been checked in in parallel on the CVS tree, too.

This is good news.

> Perhaps you might be so kind as to elucidate why you  think  the  CVS
> tree might not be up to date?

I recall reading a few older messages which suggested that CVS tree 
might be lagging behind.

>> pull the latest U-Boot source from the cvs tree?  Or is there less risk 
>> of missing important code patches by using git?
> 
> The code is exactly the same.
> 
>> After several failures at building git for my RH7.2 system, I decided to 
>> go back to using cvs - it just works!
> 
> Ummm.. RH7.2 is pretty old, with a list of known andunfixed exploits.
> If I were you I would consider to update my development  host  system
> insted.

Yes it is outdated. This is a "crash-and-burn" machine I had been using 
for testing legacy products and haven't had time to upgrade it. 
Considering it is a triple boot machine makes upgrading even more time 
consuming.

Guten tag, Andrew

> Best regards,
> 
> Wolfgang Denk
> 

[U-Boot-Users] u-boot source - cvs versus git

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <437C8BCC.4010100@mc.com> you wrote:
>
> I recall reading a few older messages which suggested that CVS tree 
> might be lagging behind.

The public CVS server at SourceForge needs sometimes  hours  or  even
1...2  days  to  sync  the  pub;ic  repository  from  the developer's
machine. But this is nothing I can change.

CVS should be considered dead anyway; I recommend to use git instead.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-
bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the
road to the drug store, but that's just peanuts to space.
                              -- The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy