On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 11:23:05AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
after noticing how large my ports tree grows while compiling, I thought
of simply deleting it and do a CVSup to get a new one after the
compilation is finished.
Your better bet is to move your /usr/ports to your largest
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:31:05PM -0500, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
after noticing how large my ports tree grows while compiling, I
thought of simply deleting it and do a CVSup to get a new one after
the
Hi,
Jerry McAllister wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:31:05PM -0500, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Erich Dollansky wrote:
after noticing how large my ports tree grows while compiling, I
thought of simply deleting it and do a CVSup to get a new one
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 12:34:24AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Even though it will take quite a bit longer you should just do a
make distclean in /usr/ports that way anything you hand modified
will be retained (also you might want to consider keeping a local
cvs repository if this is an
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
after noticing how large my ports tree grows while compiling, I
thought of simply deleting it and do a CVSup to get a new one after
the compilation is finished.
This should be much faster and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Kelly wrote:
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 12:34:24AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Even though it will take quite a bit longer you should just do a
make distclean in /usr/ports that way anything you hand modified
will be retained (also you
On Dec 19, 2007, at 8:47 PM, Chuck Robey wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Kelly wrote:
Remove all the temporary work files, and remove all distribution
files
that are not current with the ports' Makefiles:
# portsclean -CD
Requires the portupgrade port.
In
Hi,
after noticing how large my ports tree grows while compiling, I thought
of simply deleting it and do a CVSup to get a new one after the
compilation is finished.
This should be much faster and also should do some kind o
defragmentation. I simply cannot believe that the huge ports tree
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
after noticing how large my ports tree grows while compiling, I
thought of simply deleting it and do a CVSup to get a new one after
the compilation is finished.
This should be much faster and also should do some kind
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
after noticing how large my ports tree grows while compiling, I
thought of simply deleting it and do a CVSup to get a new one after
the compilation is finished.
This should be much faster and
after noticing how large my ports tree grows while compiling,
I thought
of simply deleting it and do a CVSup to get a new one after the
compilation is finished.
I, like many, just use the portsclean utility to periodically tidy
things up, or after manual ports builds if you forget to do
Hi,
John Nielsen wrote:
On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Erich Dollansky wrote:
There are at least two better ways of doing this that will take less time
and not put unnecessary load on the CVS servers.
this was the main reason for asking. If all would do it, CVSup would be
of no help at all.
On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Erich Dollansky wrote:
after noticing how large my ports tree grows while compiling, I thought
of simply deleting it and do a CVSup to get a new one after the
compilation is finished.
This should be much faster and also should do some kind o
defragmentation. I
13 matches
Mail list logo
