* A cvsup account.. @ 2000-12-30 6:08 Andrew Cagney 2000-03-20 21:01 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Tom Tromey 0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cagney @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: overseers Hello, Could someone please create an account called cvsup with no privledges other than being able to read (_not_ write) the CVS repositories. I'm sufficiently motivated (frustrated? :-) to want to get CVSupD running on sourceware. Andrew PS: Where should the relevant cvsupd sources be archived? Is there a policy on importing binaries rather than building things from scratch? If I'm going to build things from scratch then I'll need a few spare 100Mbs :-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 A cvsup account Andrew Cagney @ 2000-03-20 21:01 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Tom Tromey 1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cagney @ 2000-03-20 21:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: overseers Hello, Could someone please create an account called cvsup with no privledges other than being able to read (_not_ write) the CVS repositories. I'm sufficiently motivated (frustrated? :-) to want to get CVSupD running on sourceware. Andrew PS: Where should the relevant cvsupd sources be archived? Is there a policy on importing binaries rather than building things from scratch? If I'm going to build things from scratch then I'll need a few spare 100Mbs :-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 A cvsup account Andrew Cagney 2000-03-20 21:01 ` Andrew Cagney @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Tom Tromey 2000-03-21 8:10 ` Tom Tromey 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Andrew Cagney 1 sibling, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: overseers Andrew> Could someone please create an account called cvsup with no Andrew> privledges other than being able to read (_not_ write) the CVS Andrew> repositories. That's going to run into the group limit problem, won't it? Also, can you just use the anoncvs account for this? Or does this user not need to be able to make cvs locks? Andrew> PS: Where should the relevant cvsupd sources be archived? Is Andrew> there a policy on importing binaries rather than building Andrew> things from scratch? If I'm going to build things from Andrew> scratch then I'll need a few spare 100Mbs :-) I don't know. Is there an RPM? We could just install it that way. Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Tom Tromey @ 2000-03-21 8:10 ` Tom Tromey 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Andrew Cagney 1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2000-03-21 8:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: overseers Andrew> Could someone please create an account called cvsup with no Andrew> privledges other than being able to read (_not_ write) the CVS Andrew> repositories. That's going to run into the group limit problem, won't it? Also, can you just use the anoncvs account for this? Or does this user not need to be able to make cvs locks? Andrew> PS: Where should the relevant cvsupd sources be archived? Is Andrew> there a policy on importing binaries rather than building Andrew> things from scratch? If I'm going to build things from Andrew> scratch then I'll need a few spare 100Mbs :-) I don't know. Is there an RPM? We could just install it that way. Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Tom Tromey 2000-03-21 8:10 ` Tom Tromey @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-03-21 13:58 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 1 sibling, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cagney @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Cagney, Tom Tromey; +Cc: overseers Excerpts from mail: 21-Mar-100 Re: A cvsup account.. Tom Tromey@cygnus.com (663*) > Andrew> Could someone please create an account called cvsup with no > Andrew> privledges other than being able to read (_not_ write) the CVS > Andrew> repositories. > That's going to run into the group limit problem, won't it? > Also, can you just use the anoncvs account for this? > Or does this user not need to be able to make cvs locks? I was kind of hopeing that all repositories were world readable. As far as I know it doesn't lock the file. I could use the anoncvs account if that doesn't scare people too much :-) > Andrew> PS: Where should the relevant cvsupd sources be archived? Is > Andrew> there a policy on importing binaries rather than building > Andrew> things from scratch? If I'm going to build things from > Andrew> scratch then I'll need a few spare 100Mbs :-) > I don't know. Is there an RPM? We could just install it that way. RPM? (Ok yes, I know what that is :-). Checking the master FTP site, pre-built staticish binaries are available (cvsupd, cvsup)are available. Not RPMs. The reason for thinking about doing a local build is that it would be in line with Jasons approach when getting sourceware started - always have the source - always have a way of building the source. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Andrew Cagney @ 2000-03-21 13:58 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cagney @ 2000-03-21 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Cagney, Tom Tromey; +Cc: overseers Excerpts from mail: 21-Mar-100 Re: A cvsup account.. Tom Tromey@cygnus.com (663*) > Andrew> Could someone please create an account called cvsup with no > Andrew> privledges other than being able to read (_not_ write) the CVS > Andrew> repositories. > That's going to run into the group limit problem, won't it? > Also, can you just use the anoncvs account for this? > Or does this user not need to be able to make cvs locks? I was kind of hopeing that all repositories were world readable. As far as I know it doesn't lock the file. I could use the anoncvs account if that doesn't scare people too much :-) > Andrew> PS: Where should the relevant cvsupd sources be archived? Is > Andrew> there a policy on importing binaries rather than building > Andrew> things from scratch? If I'm going to build things from > Andrew> scratch then I'll need a few spare 100Mbs :-) > I don't know. Is there an RPM? We could just install it that way. RPM? (Ok yes, I know what that is :-). Checking the master FTP site, pre-built staticish binaries are available (cvsupd, cvsup)are available. Not RPMs. The reason for thinking about doing a local build is that it would be in line with Jasons approach when getting sourceware started - always have the source - always have a way of building the source. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-03-21 13:58 ` Andrew Cagney @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-03-21 14:13 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jason Molenda 1 sibling, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cagney; +Cc: ac131313, tromey, overseers > The reason for thinking about doing a local build is that it would be in > line with Jasons approach when getting sourceware started - always have > the source - always have a way of building the source. Well, with RPM packages from the usual places you have the source, it is just in the source RPM rather than the binary RPM. From my point of view it is pretty silly to be building things like Apache, wu-ftpd, or Kerberos from source when people elsewhere in Red Hat are already doing the exact same thing for the Linux product. There are going to be exceptions here and there, of course, but as a general rule/goal I'd like to run unhacked code and get our changes (when needed) merged back in upstream. I'd be glad to offer some kind of RPM tutorial (including building from source) if lack of familiarity is the issue but it might be just as easy to point to http://www.rpm.org/ . CVSup, of course, is a whole different case because the source is in Modula-3. But I'm trying to play "someone else's issue" on that one ;-). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon @ 2000-03-21 14:13 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jason Molenda 1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-03-21 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cagney; +Cc: ac131313, tromey, overseers > The reason for thinking about doing a local build is that it would be in > line with Jasons approach when getting sourceware started - always have > the source - always have a way of building the source. Well, with RPM packages from the usual places you have the source, it is just in the source RPM rather than the binary RPM. From my point of view it is pretty silly to be building things like Apache, wu-ftpd, or Kerberos from source when people elsewhere in Red Hat are already doing the exact same thing for the Linux product. There are going to be exceptions here and there, of course, but as a general rule/goal I'd like to run unhacked code and get our changes (when needed) merged back in upstream. I'd be glad to offer some kind of RPM tutorial (including building from source) if lack of familiarity is the issue but it might be just as easy to point to http://www.rpm.org/ . CVSup, of course, is a whole different case because the source is in Modula-3. But I'm trying to play "someone else's issue" on that one ;-). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-03-21 14:13 ` Jim Kingdon @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jason Molenda 2000-03-21 14:50 ` Jason Molenda 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 1 sibling, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Jason Molenda @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jim Kingdon; +Cc: overseers On Tue, Mar 21, 2000 at 05:13:24PM -0500, Jim Kingdon wrote: > From my point of view it is pretty silly to be building things like > Apache, wu-ftpd, or Kerberos from source when people elsewhere in Red > Hat are already doing the exact same thing for the Linux product. I always liked building it myself because I could specifically enable anything I needed, disable anything I wasn't using, and have complete control over the program. It'd take more work to familiarize myself with the program, but in my humble experience, the RH builds weren't any better than what I did on my own. As sourceware has less active maintainership (surely the next generation of sourceware is just down the road :-), using prebuilt RPMs is not unreasonable. Actually, apache is a bad example because we use an unofficial module, mod_gzip IIRC, which is not a part of the main distribution. When a user's client supports compression, and the user requests foo.html, if foo.html.gz exists, that is sent instead. Huge bandwidth savings for big files like on-line docs which can be 100-200k apiece. I also generate .gz versions of the mailing list indexes after a time period (month, quarter, year) has finished. Try looking at some old archives -- notice how the date index loads an awful lot faster than it should. One big gotcha is that mod_gzip does not check whether the foo.html timestamp is newer than foo.html.gz, and if you have any server side include directives in foo.html, they will not be expanded when the foo.html.gz is sent. In addition, I use a hack written by DJ Delorie to Apache. If you have Apache set to treat files ending in ".html" as SSI files, then Apache will not send a Last-Modified header for that file. The idea is that in foo.html, you might include bar.html. Which one should the L-M date list? What about dynamic content? Does a L-M header have any meaning if most of the page is generated on the fly via SSI's? Apache has some lameoid XBit (I forget the exact term) mode where it will send a Last-Modified header for files if their execute bit is set (some bit, I forget which). DJ's hack makes it so that the Last-Modified date for the source foo.html is sent. If you run a web server with SSI's ending in ".html" without this (and without using the XBitHack thing), none of your documents will ever have a Last-Modified header, and no client on the web will ever cache your pages -- each time someone looks at a page, they get to reload it. If a page is long, and they keep coming back to it, you're going to piss off slow-link users, and you're going to waste a lot of your bandwidth. It's important to fix, and the Apache guys obviously know about the problem (XBitHack or whatever has a short discussion of it in its docs), and it is doubtful that they'd want DJ's hack. A better fix might have a configuration option in the httpd.conf which allows the administrator to specify how last-modified headers should be generated for SSI files. As for cvsup, sources are pretty useless for this, so might as well go with prebuilt binaries. For things installed on sourceware, I always put the distribution files (source in most cases) in /usr/local/src/<name> with a pointer to the master distribution site in /usr/local/src/WHENCE. I would often leave the build trees in place, .o's and all, so that someone rebuilding something in the future could see exactly how something was configured and built. (read: I often forgot how I built something, so I used it as a crib sheet when I had to rebuild.) We have so few things installed on sourceware that the disk space usage is not significant. Jason ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jason Molenda @ 2000-03-21 14:50 ` Jason Molenda 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Jason Molenda @ 2000-03-21 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jim Kingdon; +Cc: overseers On Tue, Mar 21, 2000 at 05:13:24PM -0500, Jim Kingdon wrote: > From my point of view it is pretty silly to be building things like > Apache, wu-ftpd, or Kerberos from source when people elsewhere in Red > Hat are already doing the exact same thing for the Linux product. I always liked building it myself because I could specifically enable anything I needed, disable anything I wasn't using, and have complete control over the program. It'd take more work to familiarize myself with the program, but in my humble experience, the RH builds weren't any better than what I did on my own. As sourceware has less active maintainership (surely the next generation of sourceware is just down the road :-), using prebuilt RPMs is not unreasonable. Actually, apache is a bad example because we use an unofficial module, mod_gzip IIRC, which is not a part of the main distribution. When a user's client supports compression, and the user requests foo.html, if foo.html.gz exists, that is sent instead. Huge bandwidth savings for big files like on-line docs which can be 100-200k apiece. I also generate .gz versions of the mailing list indexes after a time period (month, quarter, year) has finished. Try looking at some old archives -- notice how the date index loads an awful lot faster than it should. One big gotcha is that mod_gzip does not check whether the foo.html timestamp is newer than foo.html.gz, and if you have any server side include directives in foo.html, they will not be expanded when the foo.html.gz is sent. In addition, I use a hack written by DJ Delorie to Apache. If you have Apache set to treat files ending in ".html" as SSI files, then Apache will not send a Last-Modified header for that file. The idea is that in foo.html, you might include bar.html. Which one should the L-M date list? What about dynamic content? Does a L-M header have any meaning if most of the page is generated on the fly via SSI's? Apache has some lameoid XBit (I forget the exact term) mode where it will send a Last-Modified header for files if their execute bit is set (some bit, I forget which). DJ's hack makes it so that the Last-Modified date for the source foo.html is sent. If you run a web server with SSI's ending in ".html" without this (and without using the XBitHack thing), none of your documents will ever have a Last-Modified header, and no client on the web will ever cache your pages -- each time someone looks at a page, they get to reload it. If a page is long, and they keep coming back to it, you're going to piss off slow-link users, and you're going to waste a lot of your bandwidth. It's important to fix, and the Apache guys obviously know about the problem (XBitHack or whatever has a short discussion of it in its docs), and it is doubtful that they'd want DJ's hack. A better fix might have a configuration option in the httpd.conf which allows the administrator to specify how last-modified headers should be generated for SSI files. As for cvsup, sources are pretty useless for this, so might as well go with prebuilt binaries. For things installed on sourceware, I always put the distribution files (source in most cases) in /usr/local/src/<name> with a pointer to the master distribution site in /usr/local/src/WHENCE. I would often leave the build trees in place, .o's and all, so that someone rebuilding something in the future could see exactly how something was configured and built. (read: I often forgot how I built something, so I used it as a crib sheet when I had to rebuild.) We have so few things installed on sourceware that the disk space usage is not significant. Jason ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jason Molenda 2000-03-21 14:50 ` Jason Molenda @ 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-03-22 9:29 ` Jim Kingdon 1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-12-30 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jason; +Cc: overseers Thanks for the notes on building from source, Jason. I see no reason to try to establish a policy on this (not least of which because I doubt people would listen to some policy I tried to hand down from above :-)), but I have taken your text about how to build from source and added my own propaganda about packages and put it at http://sourceware.cygnus.com/sourceware/install.html I've also put your Apache notes at http://sourceware.cygnus.com/sourceware/web.html <handwaving mode>The kinds of fixes we've made, suitably modified/rethought/redesigned/whatever, would probably benefit Apache and the Red Hat packages of it, if anyone has the time to push them upstream</handwaving>. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: A cvsup account.. 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon @ 2000-03-22 9:29 ` Jim Kingdon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Jim Kingdon @ 2000-03-22 9:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jason; +Cc: overseers Thanks for the notes on building from source, Jason. I see no reason to try to establish a policy on this (not least of which because I doubt people would listen to some policy I tried to hand down from above :-)), but I have taken your text about how to build from source and added my own propaganda about packages and put it at http://sourceware.cygnus.com/sourceware/install.html I've also put your Apache notes at http://sourceware.cygnus.com/sourceware/web.html <handwaving mode>The kinds of fixes we've made, suitably modified/rethought/redesigned/whatever, would probably benefit Apache and the Red Hat packages of it, if anyone has the time to push them upstream</handwaving>. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2000-12-30 6:08 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2000-12-30 6:08 A cvsup account Andrew Cagney 2000-03-20 21:01 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Tom Tromey 2000-03-21 8:10 ` Tom Tromey 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-03-21 13:58 ` Andrew Cagney 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-03-21 14:13 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jason Molenda 2000-03-21 14:50 ` Jason Molenda 2000-12-30 6:08 ` Jim Kingdon 2000-03-22 9:29 ` Jim Kingdon
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).