RE: CVS Pros/Cons

[Donald Sharp \(sharpd\)]

<cut>

>Weaknesses of CVS:
>
>There is no integrity-checking for the source-code
>repository. Amazingly, there are no checksums or
>signatures to allow the integrity of the source-code
>repository to be verified. This means that the
>repository can become corrupt and it can be months
>before you realize it. This has never happened to me,
>but it is imperative that you back up the repository
>to permanent storage (burn CD-Roms) regularly because
>of this danger.

check out check_cvs in the contrib code.  It provides a methodology to
automate this problem, via frequent running of this script.  I would
suggest running it once a week via crontab or somesuch.


>Check-outs and commits are not atomic. The repository
>will not become corrupt, but if you are checking in a
>number of files and one file fails, the system does
>not roll back the other files in the repository to
>their state before the checkin. Similarly, CVS can't
>roll back an update operation if it generates a
>conflict.

I've seen scripts that take care of this problem.  Wouldn't be that hard
for someone to write something like this ontop of cvs.


>It is a bit difficult to learn about the myriad of configuration files
that control CVS's
>behavior. The official manual (by Per Cederqvist) is a bit out of date,
so sometimes it's 
>necessary to ask on the mailing lists or look in FAQs about behavior
that seems a bit 
>strange.

I've never found anything undocumented.  The manual is terse, and hard
to read, but it's there.  If you have a specific example of something
that isn't documented properly, please come to this list with it.  It
should be addressed.

donald

Thanks,
Brian




        
        
                
___________________________________________________________
BT Yahoo! Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and save
£80 http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk


_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
address@hidden
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs