Been there, done that. The build uses 13 different platforms (Sun, AIX, Tandem, zOS, Linux, HPUX, DecUnix, SCO Unix, Unixware, VAX, etc.). Not going to happen. BTW, binary compares of executables build on two different systems is a non-starter since most compilers tend to imbed datestamps into the objects. Good ideas though. --- Wayne Johnson, | There are two kinds of people: Those 3943 Penn Ave. N. | who say to God, "Thy will be done," Minneapolis, MN 55412-1908 | and those to whom God says, "All right, (612) 522-7003 | then, have it your way." --C.S. Lewis ________________________________ From: Florin Iucha <florin at iucha.net> To: TCLUG Mailing List <tclug-list at mn-linux.org> Sent: Fri, March 12, 2010 11:09:56 AM Subject: Re: [tclug-list] GFS over a WAN On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 10:51:45AM -0600, gm5729 wrote: > Sounds like you need GIT or SVN for revision control, and > accountability/trackability of changes. Wayne specifically talked about build artifacts. Adding 4gb daily to GIT is not fun and to SVN might be downright impossible. However, this brings out another question: why can't you run the build on both sites? You can have only one site produce the 'blessed release', but for nightlies, you might be better off to do it locally, maybe even comparing the checksums of the binaries every once in a while. Cheers, florin -- Bruce Schneier expects the Spanish Inquisition. http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/fact/163 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20100312/89c6dc5e/attachment.htm