On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 06:26:09PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > Edwin Groothuis wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 09:39:19AM +0100, Alex Dupre wrote: > >> Doug Barton wrote: > >>> In thinking about the guy who posted to -stable about using the tar'ed > >>> up version of the ports tree, I had an idea that would make that more > >>> useful. How hard would it be to include the c[v]sup checkouts file > >>> with the tarball, and install it into some standard location? > >> And why not the portsnap database instead? It seems the > >> default/recommended method today. > > > > That would save me 42Mb to download each time :-P > > > > But euhm.. it should only be installed on systems which are installed > > cleanly, not on systems being upgraded via cdrom images. > > Assuming I understand what you mean, I think one of two things would > happen:
Oh wait. The cvsup checkouts file is probably a small (set of) file(s) with some revision information, while the portsnap file is a huge chunk of data with a copy of the ports tree. Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.mavetju.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Weblog: http://www.mavetju.org/weblog/ _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"