From: Christopher Faylor Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:06:32 GMT Subject: Re: Switching from CVS to GIT Message-ID: <20071016180632.GA24953@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <03f401c81010$d8833de0$2e08a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 05:23:11PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: >On 16 October 2007 16:56, David Brown wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 02:25:21AM -0400, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> >>> On the other hand, what packages have 100K files? If there's only one >>> -- the Linux kernel -- then I think this kind of performance is for >>> all practical purposes unimportant on Windows, because while it is >>> reasonable to assume that someone would like to use git on Windows, >>> assuming that someone will develop the Linux kernel on Windows is -- >>> how should I put it -- _really_ far-fetched ;-) >> >> Oh, I wish others could think this clearly. Quoting a serious line off of >> a task list at an unnamed company: >> >> - Make Linux kernel compile under windows. >> >> I don't think it will move past just being a wish list item, but there seem >> to be people that think it should be done. >> >> Admittedly, they don't want developers doing it on windows, but want to >> integrate kernel building into a windows-heavy build and release process. > > Do that kind of thing here all the time, hence my previous post. Apart from >the netfilter stuff with the filenames-that-match-in-all-but-case, no real >problems, took me a couple of hours one afternoon. Ditto. Coincidentially enough this is the reason I wrote managed mode for cygwin's mount. But, we're pretty far off-topic aren't we? cgf