hmm, on Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 08:36:04AM -0500, Ahlsen-Girard, Edward F CTR USAF AFSOC AFSOC/A6OK said that > From: frantisek holop <minusf () obiit ! org> > Date: 2010-10-14 13:18:49 > > > > (snip) > > > i have been using -current exactly like this for > > more than 10 years. 1. install snaphost, 2. install snapshot > packages. > > 99% of the time this worked great. > > and as far as i know, this is the "party line". > ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^^ > > > please point me to the documentation that says otherwise. > > > > -f > > -- > > selfishness is a vice we see only in others. > > > > I thought that the party line was that most people should not run > -current, and that those who do are accepting certain risks.
sorry, i meant the party line regarding snapshots. it is encouraged that some people run snapshots so problems are found much sooner than after release... as i have fairly good experience with running current on my desktops i do. i know about the risks and accept them. i am trying to report what i think to be a port snaps anomaly, without much luck. i havent seen time/date differences in package snaps measured in days before, so i thought i'd ask. as i had these problems with update my first reaction was to connect it with the dates. 99% of update problems is when the mirrors didnt finish their copying and new snapshot packages are mixed with the old. i thought it's the same problem. the next iteration of the package snaps have dates within one day. so i still think 2 sets of packages were mixed, and so far nobody has disproved me. i have already have the new snapshot, and these new packages updated fine. -f -- dos tip: don't use dos.
