Re: [9fans] 9vx and replica/pull on OS X

[Yaroslav <yarikos@gmail.com>]

I use replica for several tasks besides usual system update, in
several different ways.
It (applylog) behaves very reliably when changes go to a tree hosted
by a native plan9 fs (fossil in my case), yet many glitches may arise
(like those reported by Paul) if  the destination is a *nix tree over
9P (in my case it is u9fs on AIX). Problems aren't with replica but
with 9P servers on *nix.

I saw replica failing on older 9vx #Z but it went just fine when I
tried with fresh libvx32 pull some months ago.

- Yaroslav

2010/9/11 Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 10:32 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>>> > What am I doing wrong?
>>>
>>> I would argue that, while it is quite cool in principle, replica is
>>> the wrong way to solve the source distribution problem. I gave up on
>>> replica a year ago because I got tired of the kinds of problems you're
>>> having.
>>
>> while some much-needed patches have been slow in
>> being applied, i don't think bugs (or a broken 9vx #Z)
>> imply that replica is just wrong way to replicate changes
>> to sources.
>>
>
> While that may be true, my experiences with replica have been pretty
> dreadful.  I'm just not smart enough to use it properly I guess.  The
> other aspect with using it with 9vx is that it gives me easy rollbacks
> since my 9vx bits on my mac aren't currently protected by Venti.
>
>        -eric
>
>