login
Header Space

 
 

Re: rsync vs. cvsup benchmarks

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <users@...>
Date: Friday, February 1, 2008 - 1:46 am

Chris Turner wrote:

LOL!

I think I'd rather have polio that either EMACS or VI....

But you are right - try for new and better solutions.

On which I say again HAMMER fs to HAMMER fs will probably have neat 
syncing features inbuilt.

Pulling from HAMMER fs to <other fs> OTOH, needs new tools if best use 
of HAMMER features is to be used advantageously.

Eiffel should be good for coding that...

(ducks and waddles away....)

;-)

Bill
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
rsync vs. cvsup benchmarks, Vincent Stemen, (Wed Jan 30, 2:38 am)
Re: rsync vs. cvsup benchmarks, Chris Turner, (Thu Jan 31, 9:27 pm)
Re: rsync vs. cvsup benchmarks, Bill Hacker, (Fri Feb 1, 1:46 am)
Re: rsync vs. cvsup benchmarks, Garance A Drosihn, (Wed Jan 30, 5:55 pm)
Re: rsync vs. cvsup benchmarks, Justin C. Sherrill, (Wed Jan 30, 9:46 am)
Re: rsync vs. cvsup benchmarks, Simon 'corecode' Schubert..., (Wed Jan 30, 10:20 am)
rsync considered superior (was: Re: rsync vs. cvsup benchmar..., Simon 'corecode' Schubert..., (Wed Jan 30, 7:54 am)
Re: rsync considered superior, Bill Hacker, (Wed Jan 30, 10:45 am)
Re: rsync considered superior, Simon 'corecode' Schubert..., (Wed Jan 30, 11:20 am)
Re: rsync considered superior, Bill Hacker, (Wed Jan 30, 1:35 pm)
speck-geostationary