| 1 |
On 11/19/05, Kurt Lieber <klieber@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 05:44:41PM -0500 or thereabouts, Dan Meltzer wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Funy, I was just pondering that myself... is authenticated rsync |
| 4 |
> > really possible? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Yes, it has its own auth mechanism. We actually use it for some automated |
| 7 |
> cron jobs that we have. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> > The only downside to this that I can see would be the lack of |
| 10 |
> > history... FEX an upgraded -rX ebuild breaks something, I could test |
| 11 |
> > against previous -rX's in turn to find out exactly which broke it, and |
| 12 |
> > other history like stuff. This may or may not be necessary/helpful, |
| 13 |
> > hard to say without it having happened :) |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> So, can other arch testers please pitch in with their $.02? If we gave you |
| 16 |
> rsync instead of CVS, would that be sufficient? Or do you need the |
| 17 |
> revision history, etc. of CVS? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> And, any objections to a ~30 minute delay between CVS<->this solution? |
| 20 |
30 minutes is much better than 24 hours :) |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> --kurt |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives