Re: [tlug] Linux CVS kernel tree in Japan

[B0Ti <9915104t@example.com>]

On Thu, 30 May 2002 16:22:55 +0900
"Jean-Christian Imbeault" <jean_christian@example.com> wrote:

> I would but the reason I was asking for cvs was so that I would only 
> download whatever new files there were and not the whole thing all over 
> again.
CVS doesn't work like that. It just downloads the differences, not the whole file. Exactly the same as what patches are for. 
Once a new stable kernel is out, you don't need to download the whole tarball linux-2.4.19.tar.bz2 again, just keep your linux-2.4.18.tar.bz2 and download patch-2.4.19.bz2. These are small, I did this over a modem for long. 

> I was happy using 
> CVS for the 2.4-xfs tree since there no "patching" needed. Any > new/modified 
> files were automatically download with a 'cvs -update'.
2.4.18 is the latest stable kernel, btw. I saw that a patch is out for xfs. 
You can't possibly get a more recent one since 2.4.19 in not out yet. You could use the 2.4.19-pre-x patches I mentioned, but there is a high chance that the 2.4.18-xfs-patch won't apply.

>  Actually it's only about 40% faster. The 2.5 times 
> increase ocures if I use a new kernel *with* an XFS fs. What a > difference an 
> XFS fs does in terms of speed! (I only used hdparm for 
> benchmarking, so take 
> that with a big grain of salt).
The HD speed measured by hdparm is independent of fs performance, afaik. 


-- 
B0Ti.