Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 03:06:37 -0700 (PDT) From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: gibbs@freefall.freebsd.org Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, ports@freebsd.org, gibbs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NO_PACKAGE and NO_CDROM Message-ID: <199604091006.DAA16409@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <199604090404.VAA03250@freefall.freebsd.org> (gibbs@freefall.freebsd.org)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* From my own perspective, with my puny link to the net, the multiple * collections approach is far superior. But the ports collection is soooo small! As I remember, the whole ports tree (minus distfiles) was about 10MB. This is smaller than src/gnu/usr.bin/cc! (If you have such a `puny' link and can't even stand that, why are you supping -current? ;) * All of the problems that have * been brought up are simple administrative problems and I think that * solving them is much easier than breaking the old collections and * answering all the resulting email. Don't forget that failing to properly synchronize the sup targets will bring up questions and/or ftp site inconsistencies. And we have a long history of not being able to handle that "simple" problem, not to mention it has been quite a nuisance to maintain. I'd rather spend that time to do something more productive. Anyway, I have said all I wanted to, it seems quite a few people agree with me but if you really want it that way, well it's your call. I really don't care (myself anyway) if my machine and wcarchive can stay up-to-date by using cvs-all, and I'll recommend that to others too.... Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604091006.DAA16409>