Re: CVS commits
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 04:54:26PM +0200, Hilmar Preusse wrote:
> I've checked out both tetex-bin and tetex-base recently and compared
> them to the last releases. First results:
> - in tetex-bin (unstable) the file
> tetex-bin-2.0.2/texk/tetex/doc/Makefile is missing. I'm attaching as
> tar ball to keep the time stamp. I guess we don't need that file
> during build.
> - in tetex-base (unstable) Frank prepared for the next upload to have
> the docs of the Sueterlin and Julian fixed an error message of
> tetex-extra.postinst. The texmf-tree is undamaged.
>
> I tried to check out experimental with the following command:
> cvs -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.debian.org:/cvs/tetex -rexperimental co tetex-base
>
> (and s/base/bin/). For any reason I get the unstable tree. Whats up?
>
> BTW: During checkout of base I got a lot of dirs containing just a
> subdir CVS and the files in them. I guess, this is a well known
> phenomenon.
I think that, given the complexity of the teTeX system, the number of
symlinks and so on, that we would do well to consider moving over to
subversion after the release of sarge. It is slightly different from
CVS, but has significant advantages, such as this ability to follow
directory changes and so on. It's also significantly faster in
updating terms, in that it keeps a local copy of the unchanged
repository (so it will require another 60MB or so of hard disk space :( )
and this means that things like svn diff are fast.
Julian
Reply to: