Re: Deprecation of portsnap (was: Proposed ports git transition schedule)

> 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 thr

Re: Deprecation of portsnap (was: Proposed ports git transition schedule)

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 mention

Re: Deprecation of portsnap (was: Proposed ports git transition schedule)

> 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 >>> wa

Re: Deprecation of portsnap (was: Proposed ports git transition schedule)

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

Re: Deprecation of portsnap (was: Proposed ports git transition schedule)

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. _

Re: Deprecation of portsnap (was: Proposed ports git transition schedule)

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, >> >> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2020-August/1

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 7:36 AM Michael Gmelin wrote: > > > On 2. Apr 2021, at 16:27, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 4:53 AM Robert Huff wrote: > > >The transition has happened. > >Where do I find the authoritative guide for non-committers? > > > >

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

> On 2. Apr 2021, at 16:27, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 4:53 AM Robert Huff wrote: > >> >>The transition has happened. >>Where do I find the authoritative guide for non-committers? >> >> >>Respectfully, >> >> >>

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 07:26:42AM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 4:53 AM Robert Huff wrote: > > > > > The transition has happened. > > Where do I find the authoritative guide for non-committers? > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > >

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 4:53 AM Robert Huff wrote: > > The transition has happened. > Where do I find the authoritative guide for non-committers? > > > Respectfully, > > > Robert Huff > > -- > Hello ... my name is SARS-CoV-2.

Proposed ports git transition schedule

The transition has happened. Where do I find the authoritative guide for non-committers? Respectfully, Robert Huff -- Hello ... my name is SARS-CoV-2. You are not wearing a mask? Prepare to die!

Re: Deprecation of portsnap (was: Proposed ports git transition schedule)

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 >

Deprecation of portsnap (was: Proposed ports git transition schedule)

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

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

On 27 Mar 2021, at 08:20, Felix Palmen wrote: > I'm talking about net/gitup, which is a little C program with > *no* dependencies and definitely no python involved. If you don't have > it in your ports tree, upgrade your ports tree. Just for clarity sakes, running gitup ports wight now would repl

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

* Bob Eager [20210327 16:01]: > Thanks - that looks like a nice simple way of replacing the portsnap > functionality (while avoiding its pitfalls). Right now, the default configuration uses the mirror repo from github because the official repo isn't there yet. You might want to change the configu

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sat, 27 Mar 2021 15:20:33 +0100 Felix Palmen wrote: > * Bob Eager [20210327 14:14]: > > I looked for gitup, and it's moved to py37-git-up (unless something > > replaced it, but nothing in devel/). > > That's an entirely different software wh

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

> On Mar 27, 2021, at 0:19, Felix Palmen > wrote: > >> No, that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking (on behalf of many people, >> I'm sure) just what I have to enter instead of: >> >> $ portsnap fetch extract > > $ gitup ports I just did the following mv ports old.p

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

On 3/27/21 10:20 AM, Felix Palmen wrote: [...] I'm talking about net/gitup, which is a little C program with *no* dependencies and definitely no python involved. If you don't have it in your ports tree, upgrade your ports tree. -- while you still can, with the existing tools ...-- Geor

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

* Bob Eager [20210327 14:14]: > I looked for gitup, and it's moved to py37-git-up (unless something > replaced it, but nothing in devel/). That's an entirely different software which has nothing to do with gitup. I'm talking about net/gitup, which is a little C program with *no* dependencies and

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Sat, 27 Mar 2021 00:19:55 +0100 Felix Palmen wrote: > > With portsnap, I don't need a URL. It's built in. And that would be > > nice. > > Ever had a look in /etc/portsnap.conf? Although it only wants a server > name (well, much of a differenc

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

* Bob Eager [20210326 20:22]: > Felix Palmen wrote: > > I don't get what you mean. Repo details? A URL. > > With portsnap, I don't need a URL. It's built in. And that would be > nice. Ever had a look in /etc/portsnap.conf? Although it only wants a server name (well, much of a difference), there

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 19:30:03 +0100 Felix Palmen wrote: > * Bob Eager [20210326 14:27]: > > On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:04:17 +0100 > > Felix Palmen wrote: > > > I never used portsnap, but I'd assume net/gitup should serve the > > > same usecase. > >

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

## 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 Regards, Christoph -- Spare Space ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

* Bob Eager [20210326 14:27]: > On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:04:17 +0100 > Felix Palmen wrote: > > I never used portsnap, but I'd assume net/gitup should serve the same > > usecase. > > > > Probably. So would git. Only that net/gitup is very lightweight and doesn't use git, so if you want to just ge

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:04:17 +0100 Felix Palmen wrote: > * Bob Eager [20210326 09:22]: > > Thanks for this. The documentation (although introductory) is quite > > detailed. What would be useful is just to note down the exact > > replacement for: >

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

* Bob Eager [20210326 09:22]: > Thanks for this. The documentation (although introductory) is quite > detailed. What would be useful is just to note down the exact > replacement for: > > portsnap fetch > portsnap extract I never used portsnap, but I'd assume net/gitup should serve the same u

Re: Proposed ports git transition schedule

On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 21:56:03 -0400 Ed Maste wrote: > When the conversion is complete, Subversion will become read-only with > no further updates to the ports tree. If you are fetching ports using > svn, you will need to switch to the new git repository at the > following URLS: > > Web repository

Proposed ports git transition schedule

The doc and src tree git migrations are complete, and the git working group is preparing the ports tree transition in advance of the 2021Q2 quarterly branch. The proposed schedule is available at https://wiki.freebsd.org/git and the status will be updated throughout the process, and important mile