On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 08:22:02 -0500
Thomas Mueller wrote:
> I've always used "portsnap fetch update" after the initial "portsnap
> fetch" and "portsnap extract". What would be the adverse side effect
> of using svn instead?
RW responded:
> In general it's best to avoid mixing update tools unle
On 01/27/13 07:22, Thomas Mueller wrote:
Unless you have a specific reason why portsnap doesn't fit your use
case, it's definitely the way to go for just keeping a ports tree
updated regularly.
I've always used "portsnap fetch update" after the initial "portsnap fetch"
and "portsnap extract".
..
>Thomas Mueller wrote:> I've always used "portsnap fetch update" after the
>initial "portsnap> fetch" and "portsnap extract". What would be the adverse
>side effect> of using svn instead?In general it's best to avoid mixing update
>tools unless you fullyunderstand all the corner ca
On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 08:22:02 -0500
Thomas Mueller wrote:
> I've always used "portsnap fetch update" after the initial "portsnap
> fetch" and "portsnap extract". What would be the adverse side effect
> of using svn instead?
In general it's best to avoid mixing update tools unless you fully
under
"W. D." writes:
> According to:
> http://www.freebsd.org/news/2012-compromise.html
> Cvsup is deprecated. If I have a Cron entry like:
> #-
> #Min HrDOM Mnth DOW Command
> # At 3:46 in the morning, everyday, as ro