[openbeos] Re: general update tool idea

  • From: Linus Almstrom <linalm-7@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 21:08:41 +0200

I can understand the reason for having a gui app for users
that are not familiar with a shell, but constructing a new
system for which cvs is well suited I cannot understand.
I'd rather see a gui for cvs/make which would use less
bandwidth than the semi-binary approach, but both systems
will ofcourse be possible to have side by side.

The only real benefit from the semi-binary system, as I
see it, is that it does not need to rely on either
Jam or make, which ofcourse is a nice benfit GUI-wise.



On 2002-06-19 at 21:18:04 [+0200], openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> it's more for newbies for semi-binary updates.
> also,
> if u keep a cvs tree of each,u compile to objects and link to a binary 
> anyway
> (if u remove the objects u have to recompile everything. each update.) so 
> the size issue doesn't matter if u already keep sources+objects+binary. 
> now let's say u're interested in 20 open source projects, or make it a 
> 100, it would be alot of work to keep all these up to date, when instead 
> u can have a gui app that will do all that for you. mostly.
> anyway, i think it's a nice idea, please re-read it, and tell me if you 
> see the benefits.
> Linus Almstrom wrote:
> > Why would this be needed when we have and use cvs?

Other related posts: