Re: BK->CVS, kernel.bkbits.net

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 07:45:49PM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> Fast or safe, pick one.  CVS has no integrity check and you will never know
> if you have bad data or not.  And the BK checks find el cheapo memory dimms
> and all sorts of other problems all the time.  It even found a cache aliasing
> bug in SPARC/Linux...
> 
> The BK integrity check will tell you right away if any of your data is bad.
> *Everyone* hates the check until it saves their butt and then they decide
> it's not such a bad idea.  It's a lot like a seatbelt - you don't like it
> until something goes wrong.
> 
> BK != CVS.  You want fast and loose, by all means, use CVS, that's not our
> intended market and we don't care about fast where fast means bad data.

Well, 90% of the BK repositories are in read-only mode for me, i.e. just
mirros of some public repository.  I couldn't care less whether a
corruption sneaked in, I'll just reclone as soon as the mainers complains
my patches don't apply anymore :)  So putting this get faster hints
somewhere where they could be found easily (or even a go fast option
for bk clone that applies this..) would be really nice.