[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Missing CVS Windows Client

From: Mark D. Baushke
Subject: Re: Missing CVS Windows Client
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 14:16:11 -0800

Hash: SHA1

Rod Macpherson <address@hidden> writes:

> I posted a while back about the missing cvs.exe that used to be available
> for download. Does anybody know where you can get that?

Yes, via the web

or via ftp

a number of revisions are available for your consideration.

> The last response was that CVSNT had a command line client. That
> sounds like a sub-optimal work-around for a problem that was
> artificially created in the first place. In any event I downloaded the
> zip file and ran cvs.exe since I cannot locate the original. It
> complained about a DLL missing... then another...then another.
> Am I missing something? 

At a guess, you managed to download a cvs.exe that needs Cygwin support.
I understand that the Cygwin folks create a cvs.exe which is able to act
as a full client and server by providing the CVS sources with needed
POSIX infrastructure that Windows does not typically provide.

> The old cvs.exe just worked. There was no extra baggage. 
> Why was it removed?

The old windows cvs.exe was on a CollabNet host and when the CVS project
moved to, some of those files were accidentally

> Side note. CVSNT is perplexing. If you have an existing CVS repository
> keep it on Linux or OS X or what have you. If you are starting a new
> project use Subversion per Perforce. I see no purpose for CVSNT to
> exist anymore.

Some shops do not have anything but Windows and use that for their
server and have been using CVSNT for many years.

Given that CVS provides only a windows client, not a windows server, the
CVSNT fills an important niche in that it is capable of acting as either
a client or a server. Note that the CVSNT server has a few features that
are not available in CVS and that CVSNT does have both clients and
servers for GNU/Linux boxes as well as other common *NIX boxes.

Generally, if you have a CVSNT question, you do well to visit the site for help.

As to your suggestion that a new project use 'Subversion per Perforce'
(I suspect you meant 'Suversion OR Perforce'), well, Perforce is a very
good, but still a very propietary product and many would rather not use

As for Subversion, I agree that Subversion is making great progress, but
I know for a fact that repository corruptions still arise where work may
be lost and that some mission-critical projects are not able to afford
that amount of risk at the present time.

Everyone needs to make their own risk assessments and feature
comparisons to choose the source control system that fits their needs.

        -- Mark
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]