svn or arch
Enrico Scholz
enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de
Sat Dec 18 01:11:05 UTC 2004
walters at redhat.com (Colin Walters) writes:
>> CVS can not replace SRPM:
>
> Note that I was talking about prerequisites for changing to a better
> revision control system, not how our current system is flawed. But I'll
> answer anyways:
>
>> - SRPM can be signed, CVS not
>
> Right; this is solved directly in pretty much all the distributed
> RCSes.
How? Signing the data-transfer can not be compared with SRPM signing. The
on-disk data could be changed but the data-stream would be still valid.
>> - SRPM give you reproducibility, CVS not
>
> Not true if you can map NVR->CVS tag.
You do not know if somebody renamed the tag between two checkouts.
>> - SRPM are buildable with system-tools (rpmbuild); for CVS you need lots
>> of prerequisites.
>
> Not necessarily. We could just stick the necessary scripts in the
> common/ dir or whatever. Or just include the necessary tools in an
> updated rpmbuild.
You will still need online-access. SRPMS can be used offline.
Enrico
More information about the devel
mailing list