Received: from spf5.us4.outblaze.com (spf5.us4.outblaze.com [205.158.62.27]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.13.1/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j179w6w7024310 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 09:58:06 GMT Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by spf5.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B27F37705E for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 09:58:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy5sQ-00047Y-1E for migo@homemail.com; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 05:12:18 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy5TI-0007cc-CL for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 04:46:20 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy5QQ-00075h-Bd for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 04:43:23 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy5P1-0006lg-Rm for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 04:41:56 -0500 Received: from [210.143.35.51] (helo=tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Cy540-0004N3-IT; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 04:20:13 -0500 Received: from mailgate4.nec.co.jp (mailgate54.nec.co.jp [10.7.69.193]) by tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp (8.11.7/3.7W01080315) with ESMTP id j179Jl721271; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:19:47 +0900 (JST) Received: (from root@localhost) by mailgate4.nec.co.jp (8.11.7/3.7W-MAILGATE-NEC) id j179JkQ01193; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:19:46 +0900 (JST) Received: from edtmg04.lsi.nec.co.jp ([10.26.17.201]) by mailsv3.nec.co.jp (8.11.7/3.7W-MAILSV4-NEC) with ESMTP id j179Jk219486; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:19:46 +0900 (JST) Received: from mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by edtmg04.lsi.nec.co.jp (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j179JiWZ008575; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:19:44 +0900 (JST) Received: from mctpc71 (mctpc71.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp [10.30.118.121]) by mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (8.12.10/8.12.8/EDcg v2.01-mc/1046780839) with ESMTP id j179JhKt005255; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:19:43 +0900 (JST) Received: by mctpc71 (Postfix, from userid 31295) id E7BCD13; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:19:42 +0900 (JST) To: Catalin Marinas References: From: Miles Bader System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Blat: Foop Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 18:19:42 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Catalin Marinas's message of "Mon, 07 Feb 2005 08:54:08 +0000") Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org, snogglethorpe@gmail.com, Cliff Brake , Miika Komu , Paul Mundt Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees X-BeenThere: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Miles Bader List-Id: a discussion list for all things arch-ish List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Status: RO Content-Length: 622 Lines: 13 I see; so by: > Still one more problem: the BKCVS log seems to only contain the first > part of the message. It does not include any of the file > descriptions. You just meant that it lacked the "per-file log entries"? Is that important? Nobody in linux seems to use them, at least so far as I've noticed... -Miles -- Is it true that nothing can be known? If so how do we know this? -Woody Allen _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/