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

Re: SVN client vs CVS client

From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:44:54 -0600

Erik Huelsmann wrote:
>> It is the same OS - one binary file achieves everything. Now in SVN the
>> installation path seems hardwired into the program such that I cannot just
>> drop and expect a binary to run as a client. All it needs to do is just
>> connect to SVN with the user name and password and check out code.
> Which clearly explains there are basic OS understanding issues going
> on here. It's not Subversion which requires this behaviour.
> Subversion, in contrast to CVS is -however - built up from a number of
> libraries. This is a concious design decision to allow easier creation
> of other Subversion clients than the standard command line interface.
> Something that is non-trivial with CVS.

It still would normally be possible to build a static-linked binary if
you wanted one, though. But I think I recall seeing something about
this being a problem on Solaris because some of the gcc libs aren't
built for static linkage. Regardless, you should be able to put the
needed libs somewhere where you have write permission and set
LD_LIBRARY_PATH appropriately to find them.

   Les Mikesell
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-01-04 07:28:38 CET

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

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