[gentoo-user] Re: Is a git based tree going to save me bandwidth and time?
Sergei Trofimovich sly...@gentoo.org writes: Hi Sebastián, I've been thinking about switching from a rsync based tree to a git based one cloning [0]. The main reasons because I would do that is in order to save bandwidth (I've a slow GSM connection in my netbook and I sync two other gentoo boxes from the first one) and maybe time. When I had awfully slow internet I used to use app-portage/emerge-delta-webrsync. emerge-delta-webrsync recreates portage tarball from previous state and patches. It usually takes about 300KB (one patch size) per day. I've been using delta-webrsync to update the _main node_ too. I think git can't really beat delta-webrsync... Will try to do some bandwith benchmarks and post the results asap...
[gentoo-user] Is a git based tree going to save me bandwidth and time?
Hi folks... I've been thinking about switching from a rsync based tree to a git based one cloning [0]. The main reasons because I would do that is in order to save bandwidth (I've a slow GSM connection in my netbook and I sync two other gentoo boxes from the first one) and maybe time. So here goes the question, Is a git based tree really going to save me an appreciable bandwidth and time on syncing?, Can I keep the same replication functionality rsync gives me to sync my other boxes? [0] http://github.com/funtoo/portage/tree/gentoo.org
