[892] in SIPB_Linux_Development
Re: emacs19 locker
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ckclark@MIT.EDU)
Mon Jan 9 00:50:21 1995
From: ckclark@MIT.EDU
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 00:49:52 -0500
To: Kimberly Carney <kim@MIT.EDU>
Cc: warlord@MIT.EDU, afsreq@MIT.EDU, emacsdev@MIT.EDU, linux-dev@MIT.EDU,
netbsd-dev@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 04 Jan 1995 13:12:31 EST."
<9501041812.AA11933@chich.MIT.EDU>
> =>
> => The emacs19 locker is currently on hockney. The emacs19 binaries are
> => on a different server:
> =>
> => aproj.emacs19
> => readWriteID 537014510 valid
> => readOnlyID 537014511 invalid
> => backUpID 537014512 valid
> => number of sites -> 1
> => server HOCKNEY.MIT.EDU partition /vicepc RW Site
> =>
> => aproj.emacs19.install
> => readWriteID 537014743 valid
> => readOnlyID 537014744 invalid
> => backUpID 537014745 valid
> => number of sites -> 1
> => server PROCRUSTES.MIT.EDU partition /vicepb RW Site
> =>
> => I think this is a poor situation. Many people use emacs19 in their
> => daily work, and it takes two servers being up to actually get it to
> => work!
>
> Agreed, but to keep track of which volumes need to be coresident on
> servers doesn't scale. Can the aproj.emacs19.install and aproj.emacs19
> be combined into one volume.
>
> => I think that
> => 1) both volumes should be put on the same server, and
> => 2) this should be made into a replicated volume.
>
> This sounds perfectly reasonable to me, but we usually don't mess with
> a locker unless we're responsible for the locker or the owner of the
> locker requests the change. Replicating the volume is fine w/ us if
> it's fine w/ the emacsdev folks.
>
> -k
>
>
I think that when the locker was first moved to AFS it was all one
volume. Eventually it becaume three volumes, and at least two of them on the
same partition of the same server. I know this because I nearly filled
up the partition a couple of times doing normal development.
Almost everything you need to run Emacs 19 should be in the install volumes.
I think the info files may be in the main volume because I ran out of space.
If I could have just 10 meg more in the install volume life would be a lot
simpler. I see no reason why the source and build volumes can't go wherever
is convenient. If you give me the space I'll move all of the runtime stuff
onto the install volume.
Another thing is that was discussed was the possibility of including the
Linux and NetBSD installations of the Athenaized Emacs 19 in the Emacs
19 locker itself, which would require substantially more space. I haven't
kept up with the discussions the Linux and NetBSD have been having, so I don't
know if they've come up with a solution for this. If it looks like the
best solution would be to keep all of the ports in emacsdev, then we should
ask for the space to do that now, before any volume-shifting goes on.
Some of the people on the linux-dev and netbsd-dev lists should be better
prepared to say whether they want that or not.
I think it would be a good idea for someone who is around MIT more often
than I am to take over the locker in any case. I'll give a brain dump
to anyone who is interested. There are actually very few Athena specific
customizations for Emacs 19, and Solaris is a bit easier do deal with than
it used to be, it's a simple enough job. Just a lot of slow builds.
-Calvin
