On Thu, 18 Dec 2008, RW wrote:
[ Since this is on-topic, I'm taking it back on-list. ]
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 14:11:26 +0100 (CET)
Pieter Donche <pieter.don...@ua.ac.be> wrote:
'Installing the tree from disk' do you mean with that: the install
during sysinstall of /usr/ports from what is on the
FREEBDSD-7.0-RELEASE CD's ?
Yes
If so, if you have did create a /usr/ports from sysinstall, then only
a portsnap fetch has to be done, and no portsnap extract
but only a portsnap update when you need updating a program you
installed previously from the ports tree ?
Portsnap doesn't know about anything in the ports tree that it didn't
put there itself. For that reason it needs to bring the tree to an
initial known-state by replacing all port directories and other
files. For the same reason you shouldn't mix portsnap and c[v]sup.
So, do you confirm my statement that only a portsnap update is OK?
But is it then not better to do a portsnap upgrade immmediatly after
that first portsnap fetch, since fetch will only get compressed .gz
files (not decompressed to /usr/ports), so /usr/ports will still be
of the date of the release of the 7.0 (febr. 2008) ?
The extract will bring the tree up-to-date with the fetched snapshot.
You could use extract instead of update all the time, except that it's
slower and deletes user generated files in the ports directories (e.g.
README.html).
So since it's faster and doesn't delete user generated files,
upgrade is always to be preferred over extract, right?
_______________________________________________
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"
