On Wednesday 23 May 2007 06:03:18 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > At 11:52 PM 5/22/2007, you wrote: > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > # portsnap fetch > > > Latest snapshot on server is older than what we already have! > > > >That's really strange. And it doesn't happen for me. > >Is it possible that you have a misbehaving proxy which is caching > >a month-old snapshot? Colin Percival > > Oh, crap. The god of portsnap and things FBSD has spoken and said > I'm a dipshit. And of course he's right ;) > > Yeah, it goes through squid.... cause IIRC you suggested it. It > speeds up multi-machine updates a bunch. But when they all started > doing the same thing, I figured it was something on the > servers. I've been snapping for over a year, and it's always worked > great through squid. Don't know what changed, but I gave squid a > re-init, and portsnap is fetching 6200 patches. I should probably > just blow out ports and start from scratch at this point. > > Thanks, Colin! > > -RW > > _______________________________________________ > firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
btw RW, you might take a look at using csup for maintaining your ports instead of portsnap. when you clear your ports directory and start over, you will notice that portsnap takes quite a while to even start unpacking the snapshot (at least it does on my computer). however, with csup doing it, the population of the ports directory start almost immediately. to me it just feels like it gets done a lot quicker. if you are familiar with csup, you might have already seen the ports-supfile in /usr/share/examples/cvsup/. give it a try and see what you think, you might be pleasantly surprised! -- Jonathan Horne http://dfwlpiki.dfwlp.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"