On Wednesday 09 November 2005 11:13, Kirk Strauser wrote: > On Wednesday 09 November 2005 12:44, Kent Stewart wrote: > > If you aren't going to rebuild everything, every time you cvsup, don't do > > it. > > Out of curiosity, are 10 small cvsup sessions worse than 1 session with 10 > times the changes? > > Anyway, I've fallen in love with portsnap. Is there any reason in the > world why a normal user (eg one that doesn't need to fetch a version of > ports from a specific date or tag) shouldn't completely switch to portsnap > today?
One thing I noticed about portsnap that is either a "feature" or not is it doesn't catch changes you make in the tree. For example if you modify a port's Makefile and that port isn't part of the update it won't change, with cvsup it will. For setting up a new, clean port tree portsnap is wonderful, much faster than cvsup and probably way easier on the servers as well. -Mike _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
