Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 12:37:52 +0000 From: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Deleting ports distfiles Message-ID: <20141118123752.5516f591@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <CA%2BtpaK1YqnyV7rKTDMb%2BhBCE4HZgdDsn97VWb%2BiApCxHsqt%2BMA@mail.gmail.com> References: <20141116232937.657463ce@kirk.drpetervoigt.private> <20141116225501.GA52979@ozzmosis.com> <CA%2BE3k92p5k=AUX=pcQDzbSL8rFDysNnc1=3cg6s0MKHFupo_pg@mail.gmail.com> <20141117131259.511db9bd@gumby.homeunix.com> <CA%2BtpaK1YqnyV7rKTDMb%2BhBCE4HZgdDsn97VWb%2BiApCxHsqt%2BMA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 07:40:03 -0600 Adam Vande More wrote: > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 7:12 AM, RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> > wrote: > > > portmaster removes any files not associated with currently installed > > packages, the other two do can do that, but also have the option to > > leave any files that are still up-to-date with respect to the ports > > tree. > > > This is a misleading statement. portmaster also has that option. My mistake. I'd always assumed that in "-t --clean-distfiles" the "-t" had its usual meaning of recurse through port dependencies. What makes that particularly confusing is that recursing to handle missing dependencies would be a useful option. I'd still recommend distviper over portmaster because it's faster.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20141118123752.5516f591>