Re: CVS removal from the base

Jase Thew wrote:
> On 03/12/2011 09:21, Roman Kurakin wrote:
>> Doug Barton wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> The fact that we have so many people who are radically 
>>> change-averse, no
>>> matter how rational the change; is a bug, not a feature.
>>>
>>> This particular bug is complicated dramatically by the fact that the
>>> majority view seems to lean heavily towards "If I use it, it must be 
>>> the
>>> default and/or in the base" rather than seeing ports as part of the
>>> overall operating SYSTEM.
>> You are right in general, except one small factor. We are talking about
>> bootstrap.
>> CVS is used by many as the one of the ways to get the sources to the
>> freshly
>> installed system to recompile to the last available source. It will
>> become inconvenient
>> to do it through the process of installing some ports for that.
>> Especially if corresponding
>> ports would require some other ports as dependences.
>
> As has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread, CVS doesn't cover 
> csup, a utility in base which allows you to obtain the source 
> trivially for the scenario you provide above. (Explicity ignoring 
> cvsup which requires a port).
Does csup allows to checkout a random version from local cvs mirror?
So better to say csup(cvsup) does not cover cvs.

rik
> Regards,
>
> Jase.