Re: [TSVN] Performances of TSVN vs Subversion

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:23:05 -0400, Mark Phippard <markp@softlanding.com> wrote:
> SteveKing <stefankueng@gmail.com> wrote on 10/06/2004 09:21:12 AM:
>
> > On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 08:54:38 -0400, Mark Phippard <markp@softlanding.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Did you download the most recent Subversion 1.1.0 Windows binaries?
> They
> > > claim to have been compiled with HAVE_SETSOCKOPT. If so, then post a
> > > message to the list. Perhaps he had a pre-built Neon library and it
> > > didn't rebuild when he made the new binary?
> >
> > Downloaded them yesterday. But the readme doesn't mention the
> > HAVE_SETSOCKOPT anywhere.
>
> Check out these two threads:
>
> http://www.contactor.se/~dast/svn/archive-2004-10/0165.shtml
>
> http://www.contactor.se/~dast/svn/archive-2004-10/0206.shtml

So it seems it actually was compiled that way. Then I don't have any
idea why TSVN would be faster...

Stefan

-- 
       ___
  oo  // \\      "De Chelonian Mobile"
 (_,\/ \_/ \     TortoiseSVN
   \ \_/_\_/>    The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
   /_/   \_\     http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org