Re: src snapshot archives?

On Sun 20 Sep 2009 at 09:11:21 PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
>
>You seem to be deeply confused about the status of the daily autobuilds.

Don't know where that came from. I've never even downloaded a daily build.

>If you want a reliable, supported service for downloading NetBSD
>sources as of a given day, use the source tarballs on ftp.netbsd.org
>to bootstrap anoncvs, or just use anoncvs directly.

I don't know where you read I was doing anything different. Accept
they aren't there anymore and the _STABLE source tarballs aren't
on the mirrors but are under, eg

http://nyftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD-daily/netbsd-5/200909190000Z/source/sets/

fine. I'm not on releng. Not my decision. If there is reason for
the switch, great but; why have the source tarballs moved?

and, wouldn't a daily (or weekly) script to renew these files
ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-daily/netbsd-5/source/sets/*.tgz
iff a commit was made to a supported tag be a win for all?

cf http://www.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-single.pl?number=36765
Same conclusion was made by releng there (each port builds and
fails independently so cannot simlink to the builds). 

Quite literally the net result of the relocation broke qa disaster
recovery scripts, but its not like I feel entitled to some labor
from releng. I'm simply confused that what would appear to be a
simple solution to improve performance on client and server (url
for regular _STABLE tag src tgz files) is responded to as if it
is a request to re-engineer autobuilds?  I've never been talking
about HEAD or binaries. Simply want a fast (faster than cvs tag
co) way to reliably get _STABLE src checkout.

I didn't reopen that issue because it just doesn't matter.

Sorry for the trouble. Guess I should maintain my own cvs mirror
so I can get the source faster than pulling cvs each time I
bootstrap. Thanks for the info.