Re: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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 filesystem and make a symlink to it. Then you should have enough room to make most things. This should be much faster and also should do some kind o defragmentation. I simply cannot believe that the huge ports tree will still be very well organised after some months. There is no problem with this. It is not Microsloth. jerry What does the list think of this method? Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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 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 will still be very well organised after some months. What does the list think of this method? 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 issue) That's a good idea too. But, it might not do enough. So, still consider moving /usr/ports. jerry - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems http://www.flosoft-systems.com Developer, not business, friendly -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHaJB5zIOMjAek4JIRAqJxAKCdc0XT4T2YPWOWj2CxzaMY26vdLgCfUvs9 D42DFTYQ2LV+rIhUKYNOBRc= =3/I8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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 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 will still be very well organised after some months. What does the list think of this method? 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 issue) That's a good idea too. But, it might not do enough. So, still consider moving /usr/ports. it does what I really want. I do not have a space problem. I simply want to get rid of the stuff which is not really needed. A make clean takes to long. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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 issue) That's a good idea too. But, it might not do enough. So, still consider moving /usr/ports. it does what I really want. I do not have a space problem. I simply want to get rid of the stuff which is not really needed. Tuning in late but this seems appropriate: 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. -- David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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 also should do some kind o defragmentation. I simply cannot believe that the huge ports tree will still be very well organised after some months. What does the list think of this method? 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 issue) If you're running a make [dist]clean from the top-level directory you probably want to define NOCLEANDEPENDS so it doesn't try and recursively clean each port - i.e run make NOCLEANDEPENDS=yes distclean. -- Bruce ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
-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 might want to consider keeping a local
cvs repository if this is an issue)
That's a good idea too.
But, it might not do enough. So, still consider moving /usr/ports.
it does what I really want. I do not have a space problem. I simply
want to get rid of the stuff which is not really needed.
Tuning in late but this seems appropriate:
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 the past, doing a global make clean wouild die, especially on ports that
were marked broken. I don;'t know if that's been fixed, because about once a
month, i just do:
find /usr/ports -type d -name work -exec rm -rf {} \;
I've had the -delete fail from time to time, I can't remember the error, but
doing the rm via the -exec keyword, that's never failed, and cleaning out the
work directories, that absolutely cleans stuff up quickly.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHade6z62J6PPcoOkRArsWAJ46RfTDRHTli4g9z2yh3f3G6G1CqACbBr5C
r6eLTzVu5BhhBIUogOWPBHU=
=guYz
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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 the past, doing a global make clean wouild die, especially on
ports that
were marked broken. I don;'t know if that's been fixed, because
about once a
month, i just do:
find /usr/ports -type d -name work -exec rm -rf {} \;
I've had the -delete fail from time to time, I can't remember the
error, but
doing the rm via the -exec keyword, that's never failed, and
cleaning out the
work directories, that absolutely cleans stuff up quickly.
Not sure how deep the buffers are for wildcard expansion but
apparently deep enough to do the above simpler. I use tcsh, selection
of one's shell has everything to do with wildcard expansion.
# cd /usr/ports
# rm -r */*/work
#
--
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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 will still be very well organised after some months. What does the list think of this method? Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rough method of cleaning the 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 o defragmentation. I simply cannot believe that the huge ports tree will still be very well organised after some months. What does the list think of this method? 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 issue) - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems http://www.flosoft-systems.com Developer, not business, friendly -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHaJB5zIOMjAek4JIRAqJxAKCdc0XT4T2YPWOWj2CxzaMY26vdLgCfUvs9 D42DFTYQ2LV+rIhUKYNOBRc= =3/I8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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 also should do some kind o defragmentation. I simply cannot believe that the huge ports tree will still be very well organised after some months. What does the list think of this method? 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 issue) - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems http://www.flosoft-systems.com Developer, not business, friendly -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHaJB5zIOMjAek4JIRAqJxAKCdc0XT4T2YPWOWj2CxzaMY26vdLgCfUvs9 D42DFTYQ2LV+rIhUKYNOBRc= =3/I8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] portsclean -CD may be a help, if it grows as a result of compilation. Brian ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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 a make clean. Doing this should keep things in check and keep your ports tree from growing. Cheers, Brent ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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. 1) Delete work directories after building ports. If you use the clean make target it will do this automatically. I typically do make install This is what I always did but it is also time consuming on slower machines. 2) Use WRKDIRPREFIX. I set this in my .cshrc, but you can set it manually or I have not noticed this before. This sounds to be the best option. It will result it what I want and still will not put any load on any machine except of mine if I have to rebuild. See man ports for more information on the port build infrastructure and associated make targets and environment variables. I do this ones in a while but never noticed or did not understand the use of WRKDIRPREFIX. The other thing in the ports collection that tends to take up space is the distfiles directory. If you want to delete it wholesale then go ahead I do the cleaning work manually there. I delete only double entries to avoid additional downloading. HTH, I think, it really does. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rough method of cleaning the ports tree
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 simply cannot believe that the huge ports tree will still be very well organised after some months. What does the list think of this method? There are at least two better ways of doing this that will take less time and not put unnecessary load on the CVS servers. 1) Delete work directories after building ports. If you use the clean make target it will do this automatically. I typically do make install clean to install the port then delete the work directory in one command. Portupgrade and other tools will generally do this as well. If you already installed a port you can just do make clean to get rid of its work directory. If you (suspect that you) have a large number of work directories (either because your builds got interrupted or you forgot to use the clean target) you can do something like find /usr/ports -maxdepth 3 -type d -name work -delete to get them all in one go. 2) Use WRKDIRPREFIX. I set this in my .cshrc, but you can set it manually or in whatever file is appropriate for your (root) shell. e.g. after doing a setenv WRKDIRPREFIX /usr/scratch all of the work directories are created under /usr/scratch/usr/ports/category/portname instead of under /usr/ports directly. Whenever I feel like cleaning up I can just rm -r /usr/scratch/usr/ports without losing anything. See man ports for more information on the port build infrastructure and associated make targets and environment variables. The other thing in the ports collection that tends to take up space is the distfiles directory. If you want to delete it wholesale then go ahead (rm -r /usr/ports/distfiles), but it's not uncommon to have multiple ports or multiple revisions of the same port use the same distfile(s), so you'll end up downloading them again and again. I prefer to use the script /usr/ports/Tools/scripts/distclean.sh. Run with a -f flag it will automatically delete all distfiles no longer referenced by any port in your ports tree. HTH, JN ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
