On Jan 9, 2015, at 11:36 AM, René J.V. Bertin <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Friday January 09 2015 07:28:43 Bradley Giesbrecht wrote: > >> If you used svn instead of rsync port sync you would not experience this >> overwrite issue. > > Until a change to the file in question was pushed, at which time you'd > probably get a conflict error? Yes, you'd have to resolve conflicts in your repository. This happens less often than you'd think. I don't think it outweighs the benefits gained by having a simpler development setup. > `port sync` updates all sources that aren't marked "nosync" in sources.conf. > > The comments in sources.conf >> # To prevent a source from synchronizing when `port sync` is used, >> # append [nosync] at the end as shown in this example: >> # Example: file:///Users/landonf/misc/MacPorts/ports [nosync] > suggest that a local repo will also be synced if not marked that way, but > from what/where? From whatever location the local repo uses as its remote. `port sync` just does a Subversion update or Git rebase. http://trac.macports.org/browser/tags/release_2_3_3/base/src/macports1.0/macports.tcl#L2269 vq _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
