From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3e1162e60711201221r73e8f8a9t7587391782ba6af4@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:21:26 -0800 From: "David Leimbach" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] sources/contrib In-Reply-To: <5d375e920711201031p466b9063mf283acc54c2976e6@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <32d987d50711200746j51c8c6b6q2fa55b3cf45d237d@mail.gmail.com> <32d987d50711200757y359e7a45k26876ebe2626ea8c@mail.gmail.com> <5d375e920711201031p466b9063mf283acc54c2976e6@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 03c8d4f6-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Nov 20, 2007 10:31 AM, Uriel wrote: > On Nov 20, 2007 4:57 PM, Federico Benavento wrote: > > lsr, replica, for me are the same. > > I don't wan't people to have to download > > a big .tgz just because I edited one line > > of code. Plus with the ported stuff it gets > > worst, there are people that because > > of lack of memory, or whatever can't > > even build the libs, that's why I'm > > including binaries > > Maybe we could fix swap instead so people could actually build stuff > without crashing their kernels? > > > replica was already there, > > I don't like replica, it is too fragile and too slow, but I don't > think my opinion on this matters much. > What fragility are you referring to? I've heard about it being fragile but am unable to find anything to back up the claim. Dave