Hi,

I don't understand the problem CVSup is intended to solve given
that CVS allows remote access to the repository using standard cvs
commands. Is there a specific reason why we can't/don't have readonly access
to the postgresql repository?

I think it's neat to be able to use commands like "cvs diff" etc. However
I really hate it that my changes seem to get overwritten why I using
CVSup since this doesn't happen when using the "cvs update".

Can anyone explain why this is the way it is?

Thanks, with regards from Maurice.



Fri, 1 May 1998 08:36:05 +0200
"Maurice Gittens" <mgittens@gits.nl>
CVSup

This may be the totally wrong place for asking this question, but what
exactly *is* CVSup?

On Fri, 1 May 1998, at 08:36:05, Maurice Gittens wrote:

> I don't understand the problem CVSup is intended to solve given
> that CVS allows remote access to the repository using standard cvs
> commands. Is there a specific reason why we can't/don't have readonly access
> to the postgresql repository?
> 
> I think it's neat to be able to use commands like "cvs diff" etc. However
> I really hate it that my changes seem to get overwritten why I using
> CVSup since this doesn't happen when using the "cvs update".
> 
> Can anyone explain why this is the way it is?
> 
> Thanks, with regards from Maurice.
> 
> 

Thu, 30 Apr 1998 23:45:14 -0700 (PDT)
Brett McCormick <brett@work.chicken.org>
Re: [HACKERS] CVSup
On Fri, 1 May 1998, Maurice Gittens wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I don't understand the problem CVSup is intended to solve given
> that CVS allows remote access to the repository using standard cvs
> commands. Is there a specific reason why we can't/don't have readonly access
> to the postgresql repository?
> 
> I think it's neat to be able to use commands like "cvs diff" etc. However
> I really hate it that my changes seem to get overwritten why I using
> CVSup since this doesn't happen when using the "cvs update".
> 
> Can anyone explain why this is the way it is?

	When I set things up, I could find no instructions for setting up
anon-cvs that I felt comfortable implementing from a security
standpoint...

	If you remove the 'tag=.' part of the CVSup config file, you can
pull down the complete CVS repository to your machine to manipulate as you
want to...



Fri, 1 May 1998 07:22:00 -0400 (EDT)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] CVSup
On Thu, 30 Apr 1998, Brett McCormick wrote:

> 
> This may be the totally wrong place for asking this question, but what
> exactly *is* CVSup?

	See ftp.postgresql.org:/pub/CVSup ...


> 
> On Fri, 1 May 1998, at 08:36:05, Maurice Gittens wrote:
> 
> > I don't understand the problem CVSup is intended to solve given
> > that CVS allows remote access to the repository using standard cvs
> > commands. Is there a specific reason why we can't/don't have readonly access
> > to the postgresql repository?
> > 
> > I think it's neat to be able to use commands like "cvs diff" etc. However
> > I really hate it that my changes seem to get overwritten why I using
> > CVSup since this doesn't happen when using the "cvs update".
> > 
> > Can anyone explain why this is the way it is?
> > 
> > Thanks, with regards from Maurice.
> > 
> > 
> 


Fri, 1 May 1998 07:22:20 -0400 (EDT)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] CVSup
> 	When I set things up, I could find no instructions for setting up
> anon-cvs that I felt comfortable implementing from a security
> standpoint...

If you use a semi-recent version of CVS, set the --allow-root restriction
in inetd.conf and create a cvs "passwd" file along with a "writers" file,
then I really don't see where the security problem is.  You are not
creating system-level accounts, and if you do not put the anonymous user
in your "writers" file, then this user will not be able to alter the
repository in any way.

-Rasmus


Fri, 1 May 1998 07:36:48 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.on.ca>
Re: [HACKERS] CVSup