Re: svn - but smaller?

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013, mrboco@gmail.com wrote:
 > On Sunday, March 24, 2013 9:57:12 AM UTC+6, Markiyan Kushnir wrote:
 > > Tested svnup for a while, and I can say it does its job well, and works 
 > > basically as I would expect, so thanks for your initiative. Although it 
 > > appears to be quite resource greedy. Most of the time it showed 
 > > something like:
 > > 
 > >   PID USERNAME    THR PRI NICE   SIZE    RES STATE   C   TIME   WCPU COMMAND
 > > 22270 mkushnir      1 102    0 44944K 31804K CPU0    1   6:22 97.56% a.out
 > 
 > It's because of typo in the send_command() procedure.
 > 
 > I've placed the patched svnup.c (0.56), the diff and two statically 
 > linked binaries on http://ftp.ufanet.ru/pub/boco/freebsd/svnup/
 > 
 > No more CPU eating and/or strange lockups (so far). Tested both 
 > against local and remote repository. 

I'm sorry, but even ignoring all of your whitespace and style(9) 
differences, your patch appears to go well beyond correcting a typo, 
which I can't spot anyway, though I'm sure John will know what it is.

Care to explain a little more?

Also, what advantage, in this particular case, is there in statically 
linking?  Here it turns a 21.5K i386 binary into one of 575K.  If this 
makes it into base, as I hope it may, that seems a little excessive?

cheers, Ian
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"