> On 14. Apr 2021, at 00:54, Dave Horsfall wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Apr 2021, Peter Jeremy via freebsd-ports wrote:
>
>> Except that git will arbitrarily and randomly decide that it needs to run
>> "gc" - which is similarly extravagant in memory usage. Last time I found
>> one running, it
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021, Peter Jeremy via freebsd-ports wrote:
Except that git will arbitrarily and randomly decide that it needs to
run "gc" - which is similarly extravagant in memory usage. Last time I
found one running, it thrashed that poor VM for 3 days.
Would this be a good time to
> On 12. Apr 2021, at 13:12, Peter Jeremy via freebsd-ports
> wrote:
>
> On 2021-Apr-11 14:27:27 +0200, Helge Oldach wrote:
>> Peter Jeremy via freebsd-ports wrote on Sun, 11 Apr 2021 00:52:11 +0200
>> (CEST):
>>> Following the SVN to GIT migration, portsnap is now the only practical
>>>
On 2021-Apr-11 14:27:27 +0200, Helge Oldach wrote:
>Peter Jeremy via freebsd-ports wrote on Sun, 11 Apr 2021 00:52:11 +0200 (CEST):
>> Following the SVN to GIT migration, portsnap is now the only practical
>> way to use ports on a low-memory system. I've done some experiments
>> and standard git
On Apr 11, 2021, at 06:27, free...@oldach.net wrote:
>
> However checking out is a one-time action with ports as there is only
> one branch
It sure looks like gitup is checking the entire port tree every single time. If
I run it twice in a row it is no faster the second time.
On 2021-Apr-01 12:19:08 +0200, Felix Palmen wrote:
>* Christoph Moench-Tegeder [20210326 19:45]:
>> ## Felix Palmen (fe...@palmen-it.de):
>>
>> > I'd assume (someone may correct me) that portsnap will still be
>> > supported,
>>
>>
On 01 Apr 2021, at 04:19, Felix Palmen wrote:
> * Christoph Moench-Tegeder [20210326 19:45]:
>> ## Felix Palmen (fe...@palmen-it.de):
>>> I'd assume (someone may correct me) that portsnap will still be
>>> supported,
>> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2020-August/119098.html
Hallo Christoph,
* Christoph Moench-Tegeder [20210326 19:45]:
> ## Felix Palmen (fe...@palmen-it.de):
>
> > I'd assume (someone may correct me) that portsnap will still be
> > supported,
>
> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2020-August/119098.html
Is this finally decided, and
