Boston Linux & Unix (BLU) Home | Calendar | Mail Lists | List Archives | Desktop SIG | Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings
Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU

BLU Discuss list archive


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

using RCS to track system changes



David Hummel wrote:
> Robert La Ferla wrote:
>> However, why RCS?  Most people use CVS and better
>> yet SVN (subversion) these days.
> 
> Because CVS/SVN is overkill for tracking config files that are scattered
> all over /etc and elsewhere.  Much easier to just ci -l.

Yes, exactly.

RCS is ubiquitous. In the same way some people say you should know vi 
because it's always available, RCS is pretty much always available.

No need to install a server, or designate storage space.

The C in CVS stands for concurrent. I don't need, and probably don't 
want, multiple admins editing the same config files at the same time.

Files stored in CVS are collected together into "modules" - a group of 
files that can collectively be checked out or checked in. This might be 
useful when applying config files to multiple systems, but for an 
individual system there is unlikely to be a need to collectively check 
out or check in all the config files at once.

While efforts like the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard[1] and the Linux 
Standard Base[2] help to make things more organized, we haven't yet 
gotten to the point where all config files live under a single, neat 
tree, so using a tool like CVS would be more difficult.

1. http://www.pathname.com/fhs/
2. http://www.linuxbase.org/

A CVS working directory, which /etc/ would become, as well as any 
subdirectories of it that contained config files, would each need a CVS 
directory to hold the CVS meta files. That seems like unnecessary 
clutter. RCS simply has one history file per file under its control, and 
you have the option of whether to collect them into RCS subdirectories.

And lastly, if I backup the directory containing my config files, I know 
I'll also be backing up my revision history at the same time.


It seems to me that RCS is a good fit for the job. The bigger question 
is why it isn't more widely used for this purpose.

  -Tom

-- 
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/




BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities.

Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS!



Boston Linux & Unix / webmaster@blu.org