Re: Portsnap vs cvsup
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 7:08 PM, mailinglist wrote: > What is the difference between using portsnap and cvsupping a ports supfile? > The last time I really used FreeBSD was several years ago, but it seems that > portsnap has replaced "cvsup ports-supfile". What exactly is the difference > between the two? What makes portsnap the better option? http://www.daemonology.net/portsnap/ is a good summary. Basic idea: portsnap is more secure, faster, and easier to use cvsup tends to have updates a tad bit sooner ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: portsnap vs cvsup
On 9 Jan 2006, at 09:01, Albert Shih wrote: Hi all What's the advantage of portsnap vs old-fashion cvsup ? cvsup only runs on a very limited set of architectures and forces you to build or fetch INDEX files yourself. Having said that, it's useful in non ports/ situations too. Ceri PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: portsnap vs cvsup
> What's the advantage of portsnap vs old-fashion cvsup ? The package description covers that. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/ports/sysutils/portsnap/pkg-descr?rev=1.2&content-type=text/plain ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
