[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Re: [Conclusion] Subversion 1.3 distribution tar slimmer?

From: Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-svn-dev_at_farside.org.uk>
Date: 2005-09-01 18:10:32 CEST

On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 05:53:40PM +0200, nick vajberg wrote:
> Erik wrote:
> >> Why? Most of them supply subversion packages by
> now.
> That's a joke.
> It takes months (literally!) between an SVN release
> and a Debian (and all based on it) or Mandriva
> distro. Neither of these are "obscure" distributions.
> It sometimes takes a long time for other distros too.

Yes, that's a good point (Debian unstable is currently on 1.2.0,
three months - and a lot of bugfixes - old).

And my vendors - Slackware, Microsoft, and Apple - don't supply
prebuilt binaries at all, so I compile from source in two cases,
and pick up a third-party compiled version in the other (I'd do that
for Mac OS X as well, but all the packages insist on installing
somewhere under /usr, which I don't want to do).

> We even have servers without gcc/cc/whatever, so
> don't tell me about compiling svn as a general install
> option (especially if the source is no longer self
> contained)

However, this seems completely tangential to the discussion about
what should be included in the subversion source tarball.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 1 18:11:39 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.